macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 2012-05-09
Speaker: DANIEL E. LUNGREN (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Mr. Chairman. I wasnt going to speak. but I have heard this argument made time and time again that its the prerogative of the executive branch to decide whether its going to defend a law legally passed by the Congress and signed by the President. That is hyperbole. That is incorrect. There is an obligation. by tradition and by the law. that the Attorney General is duty bound to defend duly constituted laws of the United States so long as he or she can find a constitutional basis for it. It is not the purpose. nor has it been in the past. in Democratic and Republican administrations. for a Justice Department to arrogate to themselves the responsibility of deciding which laws they like and which laws they did not like. You are supposed to be the attorney for the United States and recognized as such. I recall as Attorney General of California I was required at times to defend laws that I had voted against. but I could find a constitutional basis for it. My real problem with this administration is they strained to find any constitutional basis to not defend. That is turning it on its side. The point of fact is when the executive branch does not do what they should do. it requires us to make a decision as to whether we should now pay for outside counsel. That has not been the tradition of the United States. This Justice Department. in my judgment. based on the experience Ive had here in this Congress. 18 years. my years as the chief legal officer of the State of California. and 35 or 40 years as a practicing attorney. tells me that this administration has fundamentally failed in its obligation to attempt to faithfully carry out the laws of the United States. not to wake up every morning and decide: I think I can find an unconstitutional basis for a law passed by the Congress. Think of what that would mean. It would mean that you have an administration in every instance deciding what laws they want and what laws they dont want that are on the books. instead of coming here to the Congress and attempting to change what the law is. If we believe that we have an obligation when we hold up our hands to uphold the Constitution. that means we dont just turn over things to the courts and say you decide whether its constitutional. We are duty bound to pass what we think are constitutional laws. And the administrationof whatever stripeis obligated to attempt to defend those laws unless they cant find a constitutional basis for it. not to seek every possible unconstitutional basis so they dont have to defend. Thats what the problem is here. And so while I understand many of the arguments made here and I understand what my friend from Ohio saidand I agree with much of what he saidlets not just say. well. its the prerogative of the executive branch to decide if they want to defend laws passed by the United States. That has not been the tradition of this country. It has not been the experience. It has not been the legacy of Democratic and Republican administrations going back to the founding of this Republic.
Date: 2012-05-09
Speaker: DANIEL E. LUNGREN (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. I take back my time. I will not accept the gentleladys argument that I was condemning the actions of those people in the Justice Department who are excellent civil servants. I am specifically talking about the Attorney General of the United States who. evidently. made the decision or. if he didnt make the decision. failed to make the proper decision to uphold the laws of the United States duly enacted by this Congress. I yield back the balance of my time. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Kansas .
Date: 2012-05-10
Speaker: SAM JOHNSON (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker. due to a loophole in the Tax Code. the IRS is shoveling out billions of American taxpayer dollars to those who are here illegally. The good news is this reconciliation measure includes a commonsense solution based on legislation Ive authored that would save $7.6 billion by putting a stop to this. The provision would stop illegal immigrants from getting the $1.000 refundable Child Tax Credit by simply requiring tax filers to provide their Social Security numbers. Right now. those who are here illegally can get cash from Uncle Sam by providing an IRSprovided taxpayer ID number to claim this refundable credit. According to a recent report by NBC Indianapolis WTHR. illegal immigrants are even filing tax returns that claim children who do not live in America. Mr. Speaker. there really shouldnt be any controversy over this. The American people are speaking out against this. Treasurys tax IG has spoken out against this. Democrat Senator CLAIRE MCCASKILL has spoken out against this. Even the administration supports through the funding of a verification program the idea of preventing illegals from receiving public benefits. Mr. Speaker. we can fix this and put a stop to the abuse of precious taxpayer dollars by simply requiring a Social Security number. Americans want. need. and deserve the better protection of their hardearned money. and we owe it to the United States of America to take action today.
Date: 2012-05-16
Speaker: BONO MACK (republican)
Chamber: H

Madam Speaker. I rise in support of reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act. which is just as I did in 2000 and once again in 2005. It was a critically important bill back then. and it is a critically important bill now. Thats why I am urging my colleagues today to stand up for all women in America. I thank my colleague. SANDY ADAMS. for her very hard work and dedication and also for sharing her personal experiences and turning them into a reason to champion this bill. Yet. Madam Speaker. despite a lot of hard work by advocacy groups. law enforcement. churches. schools. and so many others around our Nation. violence against women continues to be an alarming problemmurder. sexual violence. domestic violence. More than 1 million women in the U.S. will be victimized this year alone. and its estimated that one in four women in the U.S. will experience domestic violence at some point in her lifetime. Thats one out of every four women. As a society. we cant seem to find a way to stop this terrible sickness. but this legislation gives victims and their families a safe place to turn for help. such as to community violence prevention programs. protections for victims who are evicted from their homes because of events related to domestic violence or stalking. funding for victim assistance services like grief crisis centers and hotlines. and programs to meet the needs of women of different races or ethnicities. A vote for this legislation is a vote to protect womennot some women. but all women. Madam Speaker. I am very proud to represent a facility sheltered from the storm in my congressional district. and I thank them for their hard work and for their dedication in helping victims of domestic violence.
Date: 2012-05-17
Speaker: BONO MACK (republican)
Chamber: H

I thank the gentleman for this colloquy. I would like to first thank him. my good friend from California. for his leadership and for his hard work in crafting this bill in support of our men and women in the military. Mr. Chairman. as you know. these men and women sacrifice their lives to guarantee our safety. In return. it is our responsibility to provide the best possible care for them. Specifically. I am returning to an issue of growing importance to our country. and that is protecting our military men and women from the detrimental effects of prescription drug misuse. Because of the physical and emotional hardships we place on our troops. they are at an increased risk for using prescription drugs and. therefore. of misusing prescription drugs. I was encouraged to see the recommendations made by the Pain Management Task Force at DOD to mitigate the risk of prescription drug abuses and dependence in pain patients. and I would like to work with you. Mr. Chairman. and the committee to ensure that the Department of Defense and the Veterans Administration adopt these recommendations as quickly as possible. Mr. Chairman. I thank you again for your help. and I look forward to working with you as the National Defense Authorization Act moves into conference. I yield to the gentleman from California.
Date: 2012-05-17
Speaker: GARY G. MILLER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chair. I rise in support of the Baca amendment and I want to thank Chairman MCKEON and Ranking Member SMITH for their work on the underlying bill. This amendment directs the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to conduct a study of water resources in the RialtoColton Basin in California.
Date: 2012-06-05
Speaker: SAM JOHNSON (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Now more than ever the President and Congress need to cut spending and pass legislation that promotes job growth. Instead. the government is just months away from enacting a jobkilling tax on medical devices that will drastically harm our Nations medical industry. An estimated 43.000 jobs could be lost and could force these American factories to relocate overseas. President Obama wants to implement this harmful tax as a way to pay for his nearly $2 trillion health care law. This is insane. The government has a spending problem. American taxpayers shouldnt have to foot the bill for this disastrous law. and businesses shouldnt have to fork over more of their money to pay for Washingtons reckless spending spree. Its time to promote real solutionslets cut spending. repeal ObamaCare. and protect hardworking taxpayers from these destructive taxes. Americans want. need. and deserve real solutions. and we can take action now and vote this week to eliminate this tax.
Date: 2012-06-05
Speaker: DANIEL E. LUNGREN (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on House Administration be discharged from further consideration of House Concurrent Resolution 128. and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.
Date: 2012-06-05
Speaker: DANIEL E. LUNGREN (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on House Concurrent Resolution 128.
Date: 2012-06-08
Speaker: DANIEL E. LUNGREN (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Chairman. I rise in support of H.R. 5882. the Legislative Branch Appropriations Act. As chairman of the Committee on House Administration. which oversees many of the agencies affected by these appropriations. I am pleased we are continuing to uphold our pledge to reduce government spending. while providing the necessary security and support for each Member to fulfill their constitutional responsibilities. Since taking control of the House. weve worked diligently to identify and eliminate wasteful spending and streamline and improve operations by using technology. thereby saving taxpayers millions. Weve also worked to reduce spending on the production and printing of unnecessary publications. including an amendment offered by my colleague. Mr. HARPER. to reduce the number of copies of the U.S. Code printed for the House. With the support of the Appropriations Committee. we will further improve House technology through an advancement of programs utilized by the Law Revision Counsel and the Office of the Legislative Counsel that modernize and improve their capabilities. Utilizing new technologies. we will continue to increase the accuracy and accessibility of legislative proposals and changes to the U.S. Code. As the peoples House. it is imperative we continue to use technological innovations to foster transparency and provide our constituents with timely and accurate information. Id like to thank the appropriators for their support in providing the resources necessary to enhance and streamline House operations and reduce overall expenses. And later. when we have an amendment on the floor that once again tries to make us go backward in our effort to get rid of waste produced in this House. I will stand and oppose that. We have had a successful program of converting waste to energy. one of the most innovative programs in the entire country. Weve convinced the other side of the Capitol. the Senate. to join us. We have thousands of tons of waste now not going into landfills but being converted to clean energy. one of the best examples of a technology that the EPA says is one of the cleanest in the country. We ought to be thankful for that. We ought not to go backwards. We ought to understand. And in doing that. we have also given best or better customer service to those who utilize the various restaurants on the campus here in the Capitol. Those are things that we ought to be proud of and not be shy about the successes that we have had. So Ill still be here on the floor to talk about one of those amendments. as we did just a year ago.
Date: 2012-06-08
Speaker: DANIEL E. LUNGREN (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. The gentleman is correct. we did pass a resolution over to the other body. It is customary that either body determine what their printing needs are. but we do have to normally have a resolution for it. Under Mr. HARPERS direction. with the Joint Committee on Printing. we actually reduced our request by 50 percent to save money. but also to give adequate printing of what we thought was needed. The other body initially decided that they didnt need any more copies. They have now reassessed that and at the last minute have indicated to us that they see the need for doing that and have promised us that they will act on our resolution. So this is a hope that maybe this is one thing that they can agree on sending out of their body this year and over to us. But in the meantime. the gentlemans amendment is appropriate. Let us not lose the Constitution over this.
Date: 2012-06-08
Speaker: DANIEL E. LUNGREN (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Last year we had this argument. Last year. it was criticism of the fact that I had approved a contract that got rid of the composting and instead that started a pilot project. I believe. in the gentleman from Virginias district. where we are taking all of this and we are converting it from waste energy in the gentlemans districtone of the exemplary programs in the country. Were not putting this into a landfill. we are actually converting it. In fact. these products are one of the best means of creating energy from waste. The second thing is. this is a condemnation of an industry that employs about 50.000 Americans around the country that deal with the production of this product. I would say they have come to me and said: Can you at least defend us with the facts. that the FDA has to approve use for sale of these products that come into human contact. If it were carcinogenic. it would not be allowed. The fact of the matter is. we used common sense. We actually took up a recommendation by the Democrats when the Republicans took over. One of the recommendations that was made in writing was that we eliminate the composting program because it cost too much money. it was unsuccessful. and in fact it caused more energy than it was supposed to save. We did that. I thought you were going to thank us for following your suggestion. We even put it in the gentlemans districtproud employees of the gentlemans constituency are reducing this waste to energy. and yet the gentleman comes before us and says the program that you have in my district. doggone it. we just dont want it. Sometimes people around here cant take yes for an answer.
Date: 2012-06-08
Speaker: DANIEL E. LUNGREN (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. I would just like to advise all Members that we have fulltime employees working under the direction of Members of the Franking Commission and the House administration every single day who review the products of the offices of Members. There is a limitation on the number of references you can make to yourself. There is a limitation on the number of pictures you can have. There is a limitation on how large the pictures can be. There is a limitation on some of the language that there can be. We try not to censor. but we try to make a distinction between that which is partisanly political and that which is a communication to our membership. If someone is trying to suggest that we ought not to be allowed to ask our constituents "What is your position on a balanced budget amendment?" Id like to say that you have that right. If you dont want to ask that question. you dont have to ask that question. but thats for Members to be able to do that. Frankly. I think the idea that somehow we ought to limit our communications to the oldfashioned snail mail is just wrong. What weve attempted to do is to use the principles that have been established by the Franking Commission over the years to the new technology. That is simply what we have done. It is no more or no less. If people want to complain about particular messages that have come out. we can look at that. In fact. we turn down many. many suggested pieces to be sent out by Members of Congress. We have tried to adjust to the new communications. and the gentlemans amendment would not allow us to use a new means of communication.
Date: 2012-06-19
Speaker: SCOTT BROWN (republican)
Chamber: S

HOEVEN. MORAN. and THUNE have engaged with many of us on this side to extend the wind PTC. Let me end by quoting Karl Rove. who is known as a proud Texan and former senior adviser to President George W. Bush. He explains the wind PTC as follows: It is a market mechanism. you dont get paid unless you produce the power. and were not picking winners and losers. were simply saying for some period of time we will provide this incentive. Lets extend the PTC now. The solution is simple. We have to act. It will help American jobs. It will help the American economy. It will help our energy security efforts. So. Mr. President. I thank the Senator from Massachusetts again. and I yield the floor.
Date: 2012-06-20
Speaker: SAM JOHNSON (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Madam Speaker. most of us just returned from a week talking with our constituents back home. In the Third District of Texas. folks only had one thing on their mind: the Presidents disgraceful decision to grant amnesty to 1 million illegal immigrants. Americans across the country are outraged. Amnesty rewards people for breaking our laws and encourages others to do the same. Entry into the United States is not a right. its a privilege. Since taking office. the President has time and again taken reprehensible steps that weaken our border security and undermine the rule of law in America. By sidestepping Congress. the President is now singlehandedly rewriting our immigration policies. violating the trust between the Congress and the President to uphold the laws of this landjust did it again today. Enough is enough. This administration needs to stop putting politics ahead of the rights and privileges granted to him in the Constitution.
Date: 2012-06-26
Speaker: DANIEL E. LUNGREN (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Mr. Speaker. Mr. KING had to leave. and I ask unanimous consent that I control the time of Representative KING.
Date: 2012-06-26
Speaker: DANIEL E. LUNGREN (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Mr. Speaker. this is a simple bill responding to a simple problem. Actually. this bill undoes redtape that ought not to be there. It leverages the best assets of the Federal Government. working with our first responders in our local communities in ways that they asked us to try and deal with the problem. Its not a fancy bill. It is a simple bill. It is straightforward. And. therefore. I ask for a unanimous vote on this from my colleagues. and I yield back the balance of my time.
Date: 2012-06-26
Speaker: DANIEL E. LUNGREN (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Mr. Speaker. I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill to direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to reform the process for the enrollment. activation. issuance. and renewal of a Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) to require. in total. not more than one inperson visit to a designated enrollment center. as amended.
Date: 2012-06-26
Speaker: DANIEL E. LUNGREN (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
Date: 2012-06-26
Speaker: DANIEL E. LUNGREN (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Mr. Speaker. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker. H.R. 3173 requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to reform the process for issuing the Transportation Worker Identification Credential. known as TWIC. to require not more than one inperson visit to an enrollment center except in cases with extenuating circumstances. The need for more than one trip to an enrollment center is not mandated by statute or regulation. but currently by DHS policy. Given that other very important security documents are mailed to people. including the U.S. passport. there is no doubt that the Federal Government can develop secure procedures for delivering TWIC documents to workers. DHS has the statutory authority and regulatory flexibility to develop an alternative process for TWIC enrollment to ease the burden on transportation workers. The Secretary of Homeland Security should reform the TWIC process before the end of 2012 when the first TWICs issued in 2007 will need to be renewed and allow applicants to complete the process in only one inperson visit. I would like to thank Congressman STEVE SCALISE for the commonsense bill and urge my colleagues to support it. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2012-06-26
Speaker: DANIEL E. LUNGREN (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Mr. Speaker. its my pleasure to yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished gentleman from Louisiana . the author of the bill.
Date: 2012-06-26
Speaker: DANIEL E. LUNGREN (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Mr. Speaker. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker. nearly 2 million transportation workers have applied for and received a TWIC. The goal of this bill is to limit the red tape involved in the TWIC process so we can focus on the work of this Nation while being as secure as possible. The Secretary needs to reform the Transportation Workers Identification Credential enrollment and renewable process so that our workers are not burdened with increased and unnecessary bureaucracy. As with the previously considered bill. this is an attempt by those of us in the Congress to try and get rid of some unnecessary red tape. It in no way undercuts the security of our Nation. As a matter of fact. it improves it because it gets rid of a burden on people that is totally without merit. So I ask my colleagues to support its passage. and I yield back the balance of my time.