macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 2011-07-18
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. I rise today in support of H.R. 33. "The Church Plan Investment Clarification Act." This legislation will allow church pension plans to participate in collective trusts. Collective trusts allow pension plans to combine assets to invest in various stock and non stock options. This provides pension plans an opportunity to diversify investment portfolios. while sharing risks and transaction costs with other pension plans. Under current law. thousands of church pension plans are denied participation in collective trusts. rendering them unable to pool their assets and reap the benefits of collective buying power. Many churches. as a result. experience difficulties and incur expenses when diversifying pension plan investments. I support the Church Plan Investment Clarifications Act to amend the Securities Act of 1933. Amending current securities legislation will broaden the existing exemption to collective trusts to include church pension plans. This bill will clarify that clergy and lay workers are able to invest in collective trusts. despite their unique tax status. The Act affords church pension plans the same securities law treatment that is extended to governmental plans. Churches provide invaluable services to our communities. Across the Nation. church pension plans will benefit from this bipartisan bill. including churches in Houston. Texas. where I represent the 18th Congressional District. Churches such as the Bellfort Seventh Day Adventist Church. New Light Christian Church and the Community of Faith Church. This legislation will be of great significance to the Wheeler Avenue Baptist Church. the St. John Missionary Baptist Church on Dowling. the Brooks Hollow Baptist Church. and Houses of worship throughout our community and Nation. These faith institutions in Houston. as well as throughout the country. will no longer have to individually bear the burden of high fees on investment transactions for their retirement plans. The clergy and lay workers that will benefit from this legislation have spent their entire careers serving others. The least we can offer in return is the opportunity for these pension plans to pool their resources in order to decrease costs associated with funding their retirement plans. This bill is also supported by The Church Alliance. the Seventh Day Adventist Church. the YMCA Retirement Fund. the Church Pension Group. and others. I thank my friend from Illinois for sponsoring this important legislation. and urge my colleagues to work together to pass the Church Plan Investment Clarification Act.
Date: 2011-07-18
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Madam Speaker. flying in today. our plane was delayed. I didnt have the opportunity to advance my support for H.R. 33. the Church Plan Investment Clarification Act of 2011. I want to acknowledge the sponsorship of Congresswoman BIGGERT and indicate that under current law thousands of church pension plans are denied participation in collective trusts. rendering them unable to pull their assets or reap the benefits of collective buying power. Many churches. as a result. experience difficulties and incur expenses when diversifying pension plans. Our churches. our houses of worship provide invaluable service. and many of those in my own communitythe Bellfort Seventh Day Adventist Church. the New Life Christian Church. Wheeler Avenue Baptist Church. St. John Missionary Baptist Church on Dowling. Brookhollow. and many others. work throughout our community. We are blessed to have Lakewood Church in our community. as well. that works very hard. a church leadership that Ive known for many. many years. So this bill has been supported by the Church Alliance. the Seventh Day Adventist Church. the YMCA Retirement Fund. the Church Pension Group. and others. And I thank my friend from Illinois. as I said. Churches do missionary work. Their workers need to have the ability to have their pensions. And I close by saying there are those suffering in Kenya. they are dying. the Somalians who left because of the devastation of the drought. and I know our faith community wants us to do something about it.
Date: 2011-07-18
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

I thank the gentlelady. I want to thank her so very much for her leadership but I wanted towhen I said the bust. I want to equate it to the balanced budget amendment. That is what this Cap. Cut. and Balance is. it is a balanced budget amendment. But let me be very clear. because you said something very important. The balanced budget amendment. if it was passed. would virtually guarantee that future budgets would cut and end Medicare as well as drastically cut Medicaid. just like the Republican budget. The balanced budget amendment takes twothirds of the House and the Senate to pass. It is almost impossible for it to pass. And we are not like States where States do balance but they only have to take care of their State.
Date: 2011-07-18
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

So in Joplin. Missouri. the floods. the tornadoesand let me finish on this. We served on Homeland Security. We have seen the death of Mr. Karzais brother. his very close aide. We have seen Pakistani police officers shot down in a massacre by the Taliban. This is a very serious climate of terrorism in this world. And the tragedy. the backdrop of 9/11 where we had to bail out the airlines. where we had to rebuild New York and other places. that is a responsibility of America. Thats why there is a Federal Government. And if we are to play with this through the Cap. Cut. and Balance. the balanced budget amendment. we will be the tap dance. we will be the losers club. and we will bust the rights of Americans to call upon their Federal Government when they are in need. This is not a time to play with the lives of Americans. I believe that we are ready to compromise but not to engage in frivolity when it is serious and when we have to do what the American people need us to do. I am very glad to be with the gentlelady from the Virgin Islands tonight. but I couldnt leave the podium without emphasizing that homeland security cannot be undermined and diminished. It is extremely important and does well to serve and secure the American people. Lets do right by the American people.
Date: 2011-07-19
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. I rise to oppose the epidemic across America of voter suppression and requiring voter ID. Do you realize that in almost every election in my own State of Texas there has been discrimination. intimidation to voters? Where we used to be able to use a birth certificate. a utility bill. government check. paycheck. and other documents. now we cannot because someone suggests that someone will steal someones birth certificate to impersonate a voter. I dont think thats right. What we need now is to eliminate the poll tax of the 21st century. Barbara Jordan recognized that voting is a right. not a privilege. and she stood in the gap to ensure that Texas was covered by the Voting Rights Act. Barbara Jordan would not be here today if we had the voter intimidation that were seeing growing across America. Eliminate voter intimidation by elimination of the oppressive voter ID requirement by returning to the standard and acceptable requirements such as birth certificates. current utility bill. government check which provide the protection to protect the vote so that seniors and others will not be stopped from voting.
Date: 2011-07-19
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. let me thank Congresswoman FUDGE and let me make a commitment to the American people that you can be assured that these Members of Congress. the Congressional Black Caucus. the TriCaucus. will stand in the gap to prevent elections from being stolen and your fundamental birthright of voting from being stolen. That is justice. and we will be fighting for justice.
Date: 2011-07-19
Speaker: GENE GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. I rise in opposition to the drastic cuts to Social Security. Medicare. and other crucial Federal programs that passage of the Cut. Cap. and Balance Act would force upon the American people. The Cut. Cap. and Balance Act takes our Nation closer to default by holding the debt ceiling hostage until Congress passes a constitutional amendment to limit total Federal spending to 18 percent of our gross domestic product. The last time Federal spending was below 18 percent of the gross domestic product was 1966. when the median age was nearly 8 years younger and the average cost of health care was onefifth of what it is today. Even under President Ronald Reagan. Federal spending averaged over 22 percent of gross national product. Though this legislation may claim to exempt many Federal programs from its spending limitations. there is almost no possible way to revert Federal spending back to 1960s levels without sharp cuts to every program. including Social Security and Medicare. Even the FY 2012 budget that the House Republican majority passed in April. which would dismantle Medicare as we know it. allowed for Federal spending to be above 20 percent of the gross domestic product. I urge my colleagues on both sides to vote to support Americas retirees. veterans. and children and oppose this dangerous legislation.
Date: 2011-07-19
Speaker: JACKSON LEE (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

I thank the gentleman very much for yielding. I am just overwhelmed with the words "breathtakingly arrogant policies." I am literally shocked. and let me tell you why. When you want to understand. my Republican friends. why were in the position were in. what about the 37.5 percent of the debt being the Bushera tax cuts of which this bill and any of your negotiations dont in any way suggest revenue?-which the American people understand. Arrogant policies by the President? The Recovery and Reinvestment was only 5.2 percent. creating 3 million jobs. Let me say that again: 3 million jobs. The economic downturn came about with the Iraq war and others. So. today. my friends come on the floor of the House with the Cut. Cap. and Balance. As a member of the Judiciary Committee. let me suggest to you that the amendments that were put in the bill have destroyed any sense of balance to the balanced budget amendment.
Date: 2011-07-19
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Madam Speaker. I wish the gentleman had yielded because I think it would have become very clear that the Republican position is they wont close a tax loophole that generates one penny for deficit reduction. not one penny. So you cant close a corporate jet loophole if its going to deficit reduction. You cant say to the oil and gas companies were going to end your subsidy if its going to go for deficit reduction. We all know there are a lot of Washington lobbyists that manipulate the Tax Code around here. Getting a tax break. a taxpayer giveaway to the Tax Code. is just like getting something through spending. and yet our Republican colleagues refuse to allow any cut in a loophole to go to deficit reduction. not one penny. Again. we heard it from the majority leader. were going to hear it I guess all day. 49 out of 50 States have balanced budget amendments. This is not the kind of balanced budget amendment States have. This writes into the Constitution of the United States again a preference for cutting Medicare and Social Securitythat requires a majority votebut in order to close one of those corporate tax loopholes for the purpose of reducing the deficit you need a twothirds vote. Youre going to imbed into the Constitution of the United States those policy preferences. That is exactly what this does. So lets not hear about the 49 States. They dont all have these spending caps. and they dont all have that preference protecting special interest tax breaks from use for deficit reduction. Madam Speaker. I yield 3 minutes to our distinguished leader of the Democratic Caucus. the gentleman from Connecticut .
Date: 2011-07-19
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

I yield myself such time as I may consume. I just want to make a couple of points in response to statements that have been raised. Not only would this write in the Constitution a twothirds requirement for getting rid of special interest tax breaks for the purposes of deficit reduction. it would make it easier to create new special interest tax loopholes than to eliminate them. If a Washington lobbyist is pushing for a big special break. you can do that with a majority vote under this constitutional amendment. But if you want to eliminate one of those special interest tax loopholes. whoops. you need a twothirds vote. Now lets be very clear on what the President has said. Yes. we want to close those corporate loopholes. He has also been very clear that beginning in 2013 we should go back to asking the very top income earners to pay the same rates they were paying during the Clinton administration. which. as I said. was a time when the economy was booming. Now every time we mention that fact we hear our Republican colleagues talk about small business and how theyre going to protect small business. When you hear that language. you really know that theyre using that as cover to protect some of these big special interests. Why do I say that? We agree that small businesses are the engine of this economy. but if you look at the Joint Tax Committee report. July 12. nonpartisan. they say that 3 percent of all businesses would even be impactedonly 3 percent. Less than 3 percent of all businesses would be impacted by the Presidents proposal. those that file as S corporations. And then it goes on to provide a warning here. specifically saying beware because these entities might not be "small." in quotes. In fact. they say in 2005. over 12.000 S corporations and 6.000 partnerships had receipts of more than $50 million. Among those are KKR and Pricewaterhouse. Now these are all good businesses. but I would ask my colleagues whether they are small businesses. And lets not use the rhetoric of small businesses to protect preferences for the big guys. We all need to share responsibility for getting this deficit under control. We need a balanced approach to doing that. With that. I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania . my colleague on the Budget Committee.
Date: 2011-07-19
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Madam Speaker. the sponsor of the bill mentioned some House rules. I think he is well aware that you can always waive House rules by majority vote. Thank goodness you cannot just waive the Constitution of the United States. Our Founders made it difficult to get bad ideas into the Constitution. Again. I want to make it clear. this is not your gardenvariety balanced budget amendment. This is manipulating the Constitution of the United States itself in a way that makes it easier to cut Medicare. easier to cut Social Security. and easier to cut education than it is to cut corporate tax loopholes for the purpose of reducing the deficit. With that. I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota . a member of the Budget Committee.
Date: 2011-07-19
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Madam Speaker. when we were all sworn in. we were also sworn to protect the Constitution of the United States. not manipulate the Constitution of the United States to protect special interest tax breaks for oil and gas companies or other special interests by implanting into that document a requirement that twothirds of this body and the Senate have to vote to get rid of them for purposes of deficit reduction. I also think that while were all entitled to our own opinions. were not entitled to our own facts. If you look at the Medicare trustees report. it will indicate that the health care reform bill extended the life of the trust fund. and we also did it by getting rid of the overpayments to some of the Medicare Advantage plans that were being paid at 114 percent of what other plans were being paid for. Taxpayers were oversubsidizing those plans. as were Medicare recipients. With that. I yield 3 minutes to a terrific member of the Budget Committee. the gentleman from New York .
Date: 2011-07-19
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

I yield myself such time as I may consume. Madam Speaker. we have been making a point that this is not your garden variety constitutional amendment. This is-
Date: 2011-07-19
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

I will yield on your time. Mr. GOODLATTE. and Im happy when you have some time to do that. In fact. I think youre going to want an opportunity. because the gentleman from Virginia was asked at the hearing on his proposal for a constitutional amendment. which was voted out of the committee. to identify one budget that would meet the requirements of their version. this version of the constitutional amendment. and it was pointed out that even the draconian-
Date: 2011-07-19
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

I will not yield on my time. The gentleman pointed out that not even the Republican budget that passed the House. that ends the Medicare guarantee and is draconian. not even that would meet those requirements. that the budget that would meet those requirements was that passed by the Republican Study Group. which is like the Republican plan on steroids. In fact. a lot of Members on the Republican side decided that was way overboard. That would require slashes in things like Medicare and Social Security even more than the Republican budget that passed the House. So that is the one budget that was identified as meeting the requirements of that constitutional amendment. This is not a simple constitutional amendment. They know that thats a popular idea. So theyre dressing up their particular version of it in that language. talking about 49 out of 50 States have this. Again. two devices: One. supermajority. a twothirds vote required to cut corporate tax loopholes when only a simple majority is required to cut Medicare and Social Security. We dont think things like that belong in the Constitution of the United States. I yield 3 minutes to a distinguished member of the Budget Committee. the gentlewoman from California .
Date: 2011-07-19
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Let me just say this. I would not want to prevent the United States from being able to respond in cases of war. in national emergency.
Date: 2011-07-19
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

I would just remind my colleagues that the President has put on the table a balanced approach to reducing the deficit. It would cut about $4 trillion from the deficit over the next 10 to 12 years. Its a balanced approach. again. based on the overall framework of the bipartisan SimpsonBowles Commission. It calls for $3 in spending cuts for $1 in revenue. It would be raised after 2013 by closing special interest tax loopholes and asking the folks at the very top to go back to the same rates that were in place during the Clinton administration. Thats what the President said. Its hard to have a conversation when the other party to the negotiations takes the position that they will not allow one cent from closing a corporate tax loophole to go for the purposes of deficit reduction. And now we see them trying to enshrine within the Constitution a limitation on our ability to get rid of those special interest tax loopholes. They would now require a twothirds vote. That is a Washington lobbyists dream in the Constitution. I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished ranking member of the Small Business Committee. the gentlewoman from New York .
Date: 2011-07-19
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Madam Speaker. nobody is saying that we shouldnt balance our budget. We should balance our budget. In fact. the last time it was in balance was during the Clinton administration when they took a balanced approach to reducing the deficit. including having in place sufficient revenues from the folks at the very top to help cover our bills. Then what happened in 20012003 is that we had backtoback tax cuts that disproportionately benefited the very wealthy. which are a significant contributor to why there is now a mismatch between the bills we have to pay and the revenue coming in. which is why the President of the United States has said. Lets reduce the deficit. Lets do it in a balanced way. Lets do $3 in cuts to $1 in revenue. I go back to the fact that the Republicans in the House want to insert in the Constitution of the United States a provision that would require a twothirds vote to get rid of a special interest tax loophole for the purpose of deficit reduction. That kind of makes it difficult to have a balanced plan. With that. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California .
Date: 2011-07-19
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Madam Speaker. the one surefire way that were going to send interest rates up in this country and add to the cost of living for every American is if the United States doesnt pay its billsbills for obligations that weve already taken on. which is what this is about. Some people. again. think its a sacrifice to pay bills for actions and decisions that theyve already supported and voted for. I would also point out that the Republican budget that passed the House and that would be put into this bill would require us to raise the debt ceiling by $8 trillion between now and 2022. So lets not play this game with respect to paying our Nations bills. We have to do two things: We have to pay our Nations billsevery family knows they have to pay their billsand we have to come up with a deficit reduction plan. The reality is the President has put a plan on the table. The reality is our Republican colleagues dont happen to like it because. as I said. for every $3 in spending cuts. it would ask us to have $1 in revenue from closing these special interest tax loopholes. Again. they want to manipulate the Constitution of the United States to protect those loopholes. to make it hard to get rid of them. With that. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey .
Date: 2011-07-19
Speaker: VAN HOLLEN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Madam Speaker. as part of the plan the President has put on the table that would reduce the deficit by $4 trillion over about 10 to 12 years. he has about a trillion dollars in cuts in discretionary spending. He does ask the Pentagon. which is the one agency that has never passed a GAO audit. to help contribute toward resolving that deficit problem. And he also does it without making deep cuts in critical investments for our country like education. like investment in infrastructure. Were going to see in a couple of weeks a bill that may come out of the Transportation Committee that dramatically slashes infrastructure investments at a time when we have 20 percent unemployment in the construction industry. So. yes. we have to make these cuts. The Presidents plan makes the cuts. But lets not take a hatchet to education investments. Lets not take a hatchet to investing in critical infrastructure. and lets not enshrine in the Constitution of the United States a preference for cutting Medicare and Social Security over cutting special interest tax loopholes. Thats what this provision will do. With that. I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished vice chairman of the Democratic Caucus. the gentleman from California .