macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 1981-03-30
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. on Saturday. March 28. I was honored at the First Annual Senator ROBERT .C. BYRD Scholarship Testimonial Din. ner. given in Charleston. W. Va.. by the March of Dimes Birth Defects Foundation. and the Greater West Virginia Chapter of the March of Dimes. The National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis was created to fight epidemic polio. and is the only voluntary organization in history to eradicate the disease it was organized to combat. Now. the March of Dimes has turned its attention to the No. I child health problem in our Nationbirth defects. The vital contribution that the March of Dimes is making in providing health *education. genetic counseling. and counseling in maternal and infant care should not go unnoticed. I ask unanimous consent that the text of my remarks on the occasion of the dinner be inserted in the RECORD.
Date: 1981-03-30
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. I join in the remarks of the distinguished majority leader in the hope that committees would utilize the time referredto with meetings and possibly preparing legislation for the calendar. In the light of the fact tlat the House will not be meeting during the week of April 20. I think it would be appropriate for the Senate. likewise. not to meet. but with the admonition to Senators on both sides of the aisle that the additional time out of session. as far as the floor work is concerned. could be well utilized in the uninterrupted meetings of committees and subcommittees. So I will carry that message to my colleagues as we discuss the Easter legislative holiday privately and collectively.
Date: 1981-03-30
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. the debate has begun in earnest on the many complicated questions which affect our current system of social security. The e is hardly an American family today that is not touched by social security in some way. Today. the issue before the Senate is whether to eliminatewithout any detailed committee studythe social security minimum benefit through the budget process. The minimum benefit Is. in a very real sense. part of what makes our social security system distinct from a private insurance or retirement program. The inadequacy of private retirement plans made it necessary to create a social security system in the first place. We cannot simply eliminate the minimum benefit on the grounds of cost cutting. We must examine its purpose. determine whether it still serves that purpose and decide whether it is worth the cost. We must also consider the administrative difficulties involved in eliminating the minimum benefit for current beneficiaries. Health and Human Services Secretary Schweiker recently confirmed this administrative problem. Since the wage history of many beneficiaries goes back many years. not all are on the social security computers. This means an expensive undertaking to hire new employees to go through files and recalculate benefits. The. resulting chaos could very well delay the processing of checks for all social security benefielaries. Social security affects the daily lives of 35 million Americans. and. for almost a third of our Nations elderly. it is their major source of retirement income. With a program as large and complex and costly as social security. there is an inevitable risk that the critical issues do not receive the attention that they merit. It is my hope that there will be more deliberate and careful study of the system. In the meantime. I cannot support the elimination of the minimum benefit and the imposition of human hardships on those beneficiaries who depend on this program. I reject the notion that has been proffered by the administration that the neediest recipients of the minimum payment should be asked to abandon the social security system and turn to the welfare system. I support a balanced budget. But I reject the notion that the budget should be balanced on the backs of the elderly of this country.
Date: 1981-03-30
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. I the Senator yield? I think the argement has worked very well thus . It is true the Democrats have offered endments when the Republican side the aisle did not have amendments dy. but I must say also the Republileader has been very considerate of needs on this side of the aisle and proceeded to allow us to lay down amendment on Friday when it was the publicans turn. So I think it has rked out very well thus far. I hope we work out some equally desirable apach that would be mutually satisfyto both sides. he PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senr from Idaho.
Date: 1981-03-30
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. If the majority leader will yield. I think it is an eminently fair approach to the matter. I would like to be sure that I understand--and I am sure I do. because I have discussed itthat the second amendment which may be offered on this side of the aisle. then. would not pertain to the SPRO subject matter.
Date: 1981-03-30
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Madam President. will the distinguished Senator yield with the understanding that he will not lose his right to the floor? I would like to ask the distinguished majority leader what the schedule will be for the rest of the day and into the remainder of the week.
Date: 1981-03-30
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Madam President I would venture there may be another dozen amendments on this side of the aisle or there m iy not be. and the reason I say there may not be-
Date: 1981-03-30
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

The reason I say there may not be. I understand Mr. CIHAFEE may have a package that would be coming along a little later. and in that package are some several items in which we are interested also on this side of the aisle. and depending upon the outcome of that vote. it might not be necessary to call up amendments on this side of the aisle that would be directed to some of the individual items in the package. I think wa can dispose of the amendment by Mr. BRADLEY. and then depending upon whether or not there would still be the vote on the McClure substitute. it would then be our turn on this side of the aisle and rather than call up a package at that time on this side of the aisle we would hope to go with an amendment by
Date: 1981-03-30
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Very well. Then after the vote on the McClure amendment there would be a vote on the amendment of Mr. MOYNIHAN because we would prefer Mr. CHAFEE going with his package. We do not rule out the possibility of our offering a package if that package should fail. but a good many of us over here feel like we will support it. So we will go then to Mr. Mo1NUIAN and then go to Mr. CHAFEE on the package. I will say then. Madam President. that we ought to finish no later than on Wednesday even without going late into th& evening either today or tomorrow.
Date: 1981-03-31
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. I compliment the distinguished Senator on his amendment. I think it seeks to restore some equity to some of these programs. I should like to be added as a cosponsor if the Senator has no objection.
Date: 1981-04-01
Speaker: WILLIAM J. COYNE (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. the recent act of violence on the streets of the Nations Capital directed at the Chief Executive is appalling. The Congress is confronted. once again. with acts of violence which are directed against the life of another human being. Individuals who take to the Well to advocate the right to bear arms. a questionable right indeed. would be well advised to reexamine their priorities. I think that a human life is far more important and that life is far more sacred than the right of a citizen to carry a handgun. And. granting for the sake of discussion that there is a right to bear arms. that right is bestowed by society and this body when confronted by two conflicting rights. can only choose the higherthe right to lifeand move to protect that right by enacting legislation that would stem the flow of handguns. It seems to me that we must control the instruments of violence that are so readily accessible to those among us who have no respect for life. I think that now is the time to confront the issue of violence. and to control the handguns which are too easily available.
Date: 1981-04-01
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. last evening. I indicated to the distinguished majority leader certain amendments about which I was informed on this side of the aisle. There may be others. but I did not know. If there are. and I think there may be. I doubt that there will be many or I would know aboul them. I should think that it might be well to continue to hope that the Senate will finish action on the measure today. but I imagine that It all those amendments are called up. depending upon how much time is taken on each of them. together with the rolleall votes. it would put us pretty far into the evening to finish today. I said on the day before yesterday that I felt pretty sure we would finish today. but I hesitate to say now that we will finish today. knowing of the number of amendments that yet remain. but I think that is a possibility. Certainly. if the goal is not achievable that the distinguished majority leader seeks insofar as today is concerned. I should certainly feel. with great assurance. that action would be completed at a reasonably early hour tomorrow.
Date: 1981-04-01
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. I would appreciate it if the majority leader would yield it to Senators on this side. I see the minority whip is here and has some use for some time.
Date: 1981-04-01
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. on March 28. I was honored at the First Annual Senator Robert C. Byrd Scholarship Testimonial Dinner. given by the March of Dimes Birth Defects Foundation. and the Greater West Virginia Chapter of the March of Dimes in Charleston. W. Va. On that evening. my good friend and colleague. Senator JENNINGS RANDOLPH. honored me further with a beautiful introduction. I ask unanimous consent that the introductory remarks given by Senator RANDOLPH on that occasion be inserted in the RECORD at this point.
Date: 1981-04-01
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Yes. Mr. President. there are a few amendments on which the time could be reduced. and it may be well. if the majority leader wishes to do so. to proceed now with locking those in. and it might help to develop some momentum. On two of the three Proxmire amendments. I believe there could be an agreement. and on two amendments by Mr. EAGLETON as well as one by Mr. INoUrE and one by Mr. DECONCINI. I do think the time could be reduced. as shown in the memorandum I have now given to the majority leader.
Date: 1981-04-01
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. I wish to state for the RECORD the reason for the absence today of my distinguished senior colleague. Mr. RANDOLPH. I am sure that Mr. RANDOLPH would want to have voted on the amendments that have already been debated and acted upon today. Senator RANDOLPH has an excellent attendance record. as we all know. and it Is only when the exigencies are such that it is impossible for him to be here in the Senate that he will miss a vote. Today he is in Salem. W. Va.. with members of his family for the interment of the remains of his beloved wife. Mary Katherine.
Date: 1981-04-01
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. I thank the distinguished majority leader. and I am sure that Senator RANDOLPH will deeply appreciate the remarks of the majority leader.
Date: 1981-04-01
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

No. that is not necessarily the sequence in which the amendments will be called up. That is merely a listing of the amendments that was made in an effort to inquire as to whether or not it would be possible to get time reduced on any of them.
Date: 1981-04-01
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. I take the floor at this time to inquire of the distinguished majority leader what the program is for the remainder of the day and the remainder of the week. if he can tell us.
Date: 1981-04-01
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. the minority is attempting to check this out at this point. There is one other Senator that we have to contact who had earlier today interposed an objection. Just now. we are working on the proposition that we stack the votes beginning at 15 minutes of 9.
Date: 1981-04-01
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

This would not preclude further time being taken on amendments on which the yeas and nays had not been ordered and on which the time had not already run. What I am saying is that on those amendments on which the time had run and on which the yeas and nays had been ordered. the first rollcall vote would not begin prior to quarter of 9 p.m. tonight.
Date: 1981-04-01
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. I have tried to find out from Senators how many amendments remain on this side of the aisle. Do I understand there will be further amendments on the other side?
Date: 1981-04-01
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. I have been able to get from my side of the aisle the following suggested time limitations. and I present them to the majority leader for his consideration. On an amendment by Mr. METZENBAUM dealing with water projects. 30 minutes to be equally divided. On an amendment by Mr. METZENBAUM dealing with tobacco subsidies. 30 minutes to be equally divided. On an amendment by Mr. TsoNoAs dealing with urban development assistance. 30 minutes equally divided. On an amendment by Mr. RIEGLE dealing with unemployment insurance. 30 minutes equally divided. On an amendment by Mr. MoYNIANand this is referred to as the equal sacriflee amendment30 minutes equally divided. On an amendment by Mr. MOYNIHAN dealing with Puerto Rico. So minutes equally divided.
Date: 1981-04-01
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Would any of the Members on my side object to my suggestion that by coming in at 9:30 and beginning by 10. we would wrap up final passage by no later than 6 p.m. tomorrow. and hopefully do better than that?
Date: 1981-04-01
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Would Senators be willing to say not later than 5 oclock? That would give us a total of 7 hours.
Date: 1981-04-01
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

I will make a suggestion to the distinguished majority leader. I have had some other Senators talking to me. I suggest that he proPound the request he wishes: that the Senate complete action on this resolution no later than 7. and we would strive to do better during the day.
Date: 1981-04-01
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. water projects that he might offer I ask the fact that certain time limitations are that there not be a time limitation. that being offered on certain amendments it be the hour under the bill. I do not does not rule out other amendments. think the Senator would disagree with Senators may be assured that they will that. have an opportunity to offer other Mr. METZENBAUM. The Senator from amendments if they wish to do so. even Ohio wants to make it very clear that he though those amendments have not been is not at all certain he wil call up that specified this evening. There would be amendment. I certainly cannot object to a final time of not later than 7 oclock. the fact of taking the ful hour. The however. If the majority leader presents Senator from Ohio does want to make it that request. clear that if we cannot bring the matter
Date: 1981-04-01
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. that I am not trying to force the issue or I hope the Senator will not take that Proceed with undue haste. but tomorrow position. There are some Senators who night is really the last practical time that want to be assured that they will have we can devote a great deal of attention an opportunity to have a little time on to this matter. It should be wrapped up. their amendments. The 7 oclock limit That will be 7 full days of consideration. is the outside limit. The Senate might I believe. finish earlier. but that would give them Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President. assurance that they would not call up will the majority leader yield? their amendments and not have time on Mr. BAKER. Yes. vleld. them. The Senator has had an oppor- Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. I Join with tunity to debate his amendments today. him In the expressionthat there Is no need to carry this beyond tomorrow. In the light of the amendments that have been enumerated. In the light of the known amendments that still exist. I should think that the Senate ought to finish tomorrow. regardless of what hour. It seems to me that with the time limits that have been established or. if they are established by the granting of the request. the Senate should be able to complete its work circa 7 p.m.. give or take a little bit.
Date: 1981-04-02
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. I am sure that my colleagues on this side of the aisle welcome the reports that are given to the Senate by the distinguished majority leader. We are all very thankful to note the progress that the President is making. and we wish for him the very earliest and complete recovery.
Date: 1981-04-02
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. reserving the right to object. I believe the distinguished assistant leader may have meant to exclude for the moment Executive Calendar No. 83.
Date: 1981-04-02
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
Date: 1981-04-02
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. I yield myself 1 minute off the resolution. Mr. President. I ask Mr. EAGLETON to assume the position here at this desk. and I designate him. on behalf of Mr. HOLLINcs. to control the time on the resolution during the discussion of the two amendments of the Senator from Missouri.
Date: 1981-04-02
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. I support the amendment which is being offered by the distinguished Senator from Florida. Mr. CHILES. This amendment would restore $100 million in budget authority for vocational education in each of the 3 fiscal years. 1981. 1982. and 1983. While the bulk of support for vocational education programs Is carried by the States. the Federal commitment serves as a stimulus for State participation and helps meet costs in the programs which the States otherwise would not be ablo to carry alone. One need only look at the vocational education program in West Virginia and at the tremendous forward strides which it has made in the last 10 years to recognize the value of Federal support for vocational education. Enrollments in vocational education have risen from 56.513 in 1970. to 119.927 in 1979. an increase of 112 percent. In 1979. over 90 percent of students completing secondary vocational education programs found employment. and over 95 percent of adult students found jobs. In 1970. there were only 38 area vocationaltechnical centers. At the present time. there are 94 such facilities. I have no doubt that Federal support for vocational education has provided the impetus for growth which vocational education has enjoyed in my State. The cuts in Federal funding for vocational education which the Budget Committee is recommending would result in a reduction in the scope and quality of vocational education. States would not be able to continue serving special populations. that is. the handicapped and the disadvantaged. they would not be able to purchase costly equipment and supplies. they would not be able to modernize vocational education programs to keep pace with changing technologies. In other words. they would not be able to maintain the programs at a level consistent with demand and the requirements of the job market. The major reason that people enroll in vocational education is to learn a skill that will earn them a living. and the main ingredient in every program is job training. In todays increasingly mechaniZed and technological society. good job skills are necessary to increased productivity and economic growth. We are all aware of the fiscal pressures which our Nation is facing. Vocational education. like every other Federal program. must reexamine how it is using its resources and work to eliminate costly duplication. But now is not the time to reduce funding for this program to a level where it will be unable to provide a necessary and important service. The Budget Committee recommendation would reduce funding for vocational education to that level. One of the most important kinds ot assistance that we can give to people who are out of work and who are suffering economic hardship is the opportunity to learn a skill that will get them a job. Vocational education provides that assistance. I urge my colleagues to support this .amendment.
Date: 1981-04-06
Speaker: PETER A. PEYSER (democrat)
Chamber: H

House of Representatives. 301 Cannon * House Office Building. Washington. D. C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN PEYSER: I certainly applaud your leadership efforts in the fight to sustain the student assistance programs of the government The proposals before the Congress have the potential to wreak havoc on higher education in general and on the private sector in particular. At Cornell alone some $1.5 million of our $8 million annual budget comes directly from federal student assistance programs. If a students freedom of choice is to be safeguarded. continuing financial assistance is an absolute necessity. Although there are many specific proposals that could be very deleterious to the financing of higher education. allow me to illustrate my concern by indicating the impact of just one of these items. tlhe $25.000 income cap for the Guaranteed Student Loan program. This year 472 Cornell students (50.6 percent of the student body) partly financed a year at Cornell through guaranteed loans totaling $933.238. These figures include 132 loans totaling $268.101 to students from families with incomes above $25.000 and. in addition. another 41 loans for $93.750 to students who did not even ask for financial aidpresumably the families also are above the $25.000 figure. Inposition of a $25.000 income cutoff would have meant the loss of $361.851 in financing for 173 students attending Cornell this year. Cornell along with 12 other premier midwestern colleges form the Associated Colleges of the MIdwestone of the oldest higher education consortiums In the nation. The impact on these 13 colleges for this academic year would have seen over 6.000 students (roughly onethird the total enrollment) forfeit more than $13 million in guaranteed student loans if the $25.000 income test had been enacted. These figures clearly support the need to take another look at the proposed reductions. This is made particularly obvious in light of the fact that I have limited my discussion to but one specific in but one program out of many specifics in many higher educrtion programs being considered for reduction. I hope this information is helpful In your efforts and if we can be of any further assistance feel free to call on me or Mr. Frank Krivo. a member of my staff who has responsibility and expertise in this area and who has been in contact with your Mr. Williams. Sincerely. PHILIP B. SEcon. President.
Date: 1981-04-07
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. reserving the right to object. and I will not object. I have cleared this resolution with Mr. BIDEN. the ranking member on the Judiciary Committee. and there is no objection from this side.