macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. all around America this morning a very wonderful thing was happening. About 4 oclock or 4:30 a.m. hundreds of thousands of young men and women and their parents and their trainers and their coaches were getting out and about. In order to get to the fieldhouse. the municipal gymnasium. the YMCA. the CYO. maybe down to the Potomac before dawn this morning. these young swimmers. speed skaters. rollers. marchers. basketball players. cyclists. figure skaters. short-. medium-. and longdistance runners. pole vaulters. javelin throwers. discus throwers. all our young athletes made their way to their respective training grounds. For all these young Americans. for their parents. their coaches. and trainers. for all their efforts and blood. sweat. and tears. as well as for another group of Americans. those who participate in wheelchair basketball games. those who work with the National Association of Sports for Cerebral Palsy. the Association for Blind Athletes. and all those who work night and day for the Special Olympic nationwide. for all these hundreds of thousands of young Americans. I say to you after long and hard deliberation. after much workand by the way. I am on the Coinage Subcommittee. I attended all the hearings. no one has worked harder on this legislation than I have. I take a back seat to no onefor all these young Americans. and by the way. no million dollars was spent by the Olympics for lobbying. The lobbying was done by these people. The lobbying was done by the medalists who came before us. The lobbying was done by the volunteers around this country. who though they themselves were not successful enough as athletes in many cases to participate and compete in the Olympics. nonetheless they have a great dedication to the U.S. Olympics and to the greatness of this Nation. For all the people who really did the lobbying and for those who studied the matter carefully. and I have all the respect in the world for my subcommittee chairman. his opinion. his judgment differs from mine and there are two schools of thought. I do. indeed. hope that we will tip the scales in favor of the legislation that is supported by the Treasury. the administration. the U.S. Olympic Committee. the LAOOC and the hundreds of organizations throughout this Nation who are dependent upon the result of our actions here today. who have said. "Support S. 1230."
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

I thank the gentleman for his contribution and I do. indeed. hope we can defeat the substitute and overwhelmingly adopt S.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent that. in the engrossment of the bill. the Clerk be authorized to correct section numbers. punctuation. and cross references and to make such other technical and conforming changes as may be necessary to reflect the actions of the House in amending the bill. S. 1230.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks. and to include extraneous matter. on the Senate bill just passed.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I move that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill . to revitalize the housing industry by strengthening the financial stability of home mortgage lending institutions and insuring the availability of home mortgage loans.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Naturally. it is not the committee chairmans intcat to make this Christmastree legislation. The gentleman is a member of the committee. He is aware of the fact that some a mendments were ruled out of order as not being germane. I did that because I did not feel that this was the proper vehicle for some of the amendments that were proffered. and I can assure the gentleman that the same will apply in negotiations with the Senate.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

I will say to the gentleman that it is not my intent to ask for adoption of this legislation as a means of accomplishing other things which have not been considered by the House.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

I restate to the gentleman that it is not the intent of this committee chairman to send this legislation over and accept legislative items that have not been considered by our committee and by the House.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

I do not know about "pulling." I wish the gentleman would not press so hard. I think that I have answered his question.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I yield myself 3 minutes. Mr. Chairman. I would like to make a point. and that is that the committee bill indeed asks for $8.5 billion in guarantees. This has no budgetary effect whatsoever. None whatsoever. There is no cash whatsoever that changes hands. A question was asked by the gentleman from Oregon a little earlier. when the gentleman from Ohio was speaking. If the gentleman will give me his attention. the committee bill provides $8.5 billion in guarantees. v. ith no cash transactions. In other words. the institution receives a net worth guarantee certificate to tide it over. During that period of time. hopefully. according to projections of the administration. interest rates will subside. come down. allowing the institution to recoup and then return that certificate. No cost. not one red penny. The Wylie substitute will cost the FSLIC fund $1.2 billion. The market value of that fund today is $3.9 billion. Do you know what could happen when that fund is depleted? And the way things are going. it will not be long. They have to come to us for additional money. That is where the cost factor is. The gerleman is concerned about the effect on the deficit. You vote for the committee bill. You be cautious of Lhe Wylie substitute.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

The Appropriations Committee would have to approve the guarantee. the full faith and credit. but until such time as one of those net worth guarantee certificates has to be cashed in because an institution fails. because interest rates were not brought down by the economic policies of the administration. we would not have to appropriate 1 thin dime. As I stateand we will argue this a little furtherCBO estimates that my bill is indeed a moneymaker. whereas the gentlemans bill. unfortunately. will cost the fund.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

I respectfully disagree with the gentleman. He is in error on that point. Mr. Chairman. I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Illinois .
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Was the gentleman not concerned about the rash of mergers that are being forced upon the thrift industry right now through the regulatory agencies2 Was the gentleman not concerned?
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

That is right. Now the regulatory agency is now being told under the Wylie substitute to continue that process. Does the gentleman not see what is going to happen? No restrictions on mergers as in my bill.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

The problem with the Wylie substitute is that same insuring fund has been forcing these mergers and throwing people out of Jobs in order to preserve their fund that is down so low now. You do not think they are going to do it even more with the Wylie substitute. That is going to take money out of that same insuring fund and bring it down even lower.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Development. the gentleman from Texas .
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I would say to the gentleman. as I stated to his colleague. the gentleman from Texas. a little earlier. it is not the intent of the chairman that this legislation be used to accomplish other things. Were there to be other legislation adopted. it will be done in the ordinary course of legislation in the House.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairr.ian. I ask unanimous consent that the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute be considered as read. printed in the RECORD. and open for amendment at any point.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. we can abbreviate this. I think the Members of the House would appreciate it. I am prepared to accept the gentlemans amendment.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

I thank the gentleman for yielding. I want to make a point. No. 1. we amended the gentlemans amendment and it is now down to 4 percent. But on this Accounting Standards Board. some staff member with a green eyeshade came up with a quick opinion yesterday and also he was not asked for his opinion on the Wylie substitute. So I would not give too much credence to that one.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I can assure the gentleman that as soon as the Senate accepts H.R. 6267 as reported by our committee there will be no problem getting the appropriation. any more than there was getting the appropriation for the housing stimulus bill that passed here a week and a half ago so overwhelmingly.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

To follow up on what the gentleman was saying: There is no cost or outlay. as the gentlemdns quote from the report from the Congressional Budget Office indicates. However. the substitute. according to the sponsor himself. involves outlays of $1.2 billion. is that not a fact?
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

So the qt Germain bill has no budgetary t. ict. no outlays. whereas the substitute requires outlays that are included in the budget tables of $1.2 billion. Furthermore. if you want speedy action on something like the Wylie substitute. talk to the Senate. The regulators bill gives the regulators the discretion that they need for the type of capital infusion contemplated in the Wylie substitute. If they will only pass the regulators bill it does that. I do not want to take a chance and that is why I am opposing this substitute and saying let us go with H.R. 6267 as reported by the committee. I would like to also point out that H.R. 6267 is endorsed by and supported by the U.S. League. the Independent Bankers. the National Association of Mutual Savings Banks. and the Consumer Coalition. and they all indeed also oppose the Wylie substitute.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I rise in opposition to the substitute. Mr. Chairman. I would say to my colleague that I will yield to him. I wanted to make a statement.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Well. you see. they have been using it on all these mergers. They cost money. Their contingent liabilities are rising. The Wylie substitute. as I stated. means 1.700. forced mergers between now and 1985.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. I thought I made my myself clear. Evidently. I did not. I am saying that the $107 billion in the resolution constitute new taxes. I am saying that we do not know what they are going to be. We just give a blank check to add new taxes. I was giving some illustrations of new taxes that could be imposed to make up the $107 billion. I am opposed to those taxes. That is why I intend to vote against the resolution.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. Presi. chairman and the ranking member of what that is? dent. I am saying I want to see the the Finance Committee saying It is Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. The Senathird year of the KempRoth tax their responsibility to decide and that tor is not telling us in this resolution scheme deferred. we have to deal with the broad con- what taxes are going to be raised.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

That is $76 I think. since this committee. which lution. billion over 3 years. If the Senator will works long hours and is supposed to Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. The Senayield. I shall answer his first question. understand macroeconomics and look tor wants us to give a blank check to which he asked about the taxes that I at the whole budget. is being bound raise $107 billion in new taxes. which said might be imposed. He seemed to regularly by that rule that we do not could be a tax on social security paywonder where I was getting the idea tell the committees what the tax mix ments. a. tax on veterans retirement that such taxes might be imposed. If should be. I think the Senate ought to benefits. a tax on railroad retirement he wants to look on page 51 of the follow that. not only when they adopt benefits. and on and on. first concurrent resolution on the it for us. but all the time. I think that Mr. DOLE. But the Senator from budget. he will see. is fair to our committees. Kansas did not offer the resolution. The list of tax expenditures in table 4 in. Mr. DOLE. I would just say this. and Certainly if I offered it. I would try to cludes possible options for revenue in. then I yield the floor: I must assume. tell the Members what I had in mind. creases. Other options for increasing rev- then. the Senator from West Virginia what is a fair and equitable and just enues include expansion of excise taxes and wants the big business corporations tax reduction. a variety of possibilities for oil import fees not to be taxedlet there be no mini. Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. The Senaand other types of energy taxes. mum tax on big business or individuals tor from Kansas did not offer the resoThen. on page 52 through page 61. who make a lot of money. not to lution.. I did not either. That resoluthere are several options suggested. modify safe harbor leasinglet physi. tion came out of the Republican conWhat I am saying is that I do not cians and lawyers put away $47.000 a ference on Tuesday in which the Senathink we should use this blank check year tax free while we are taking tor from Kansas participated. for $107 billion in increased taxes. money away from food stamp families. Mr. DOLE. The one the Senator just many of which I have referred to and - We are looking at a number o( areas. offered. which are being discussed as possibili- I might say to the distinguished mi- Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. The ties. Why not simply tell the Finance nority leader. in the Senate Finance amendment I am offering would suggest deferring. the third year of the tax cut.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

The Finance Committee is going to work that out. just as the Finance Committee is going to have to work out the $107 billion in new taxes.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. I rise in support of the amendment offered by the distinguished Senator from Florida . to restore funding for veterans costofliving adjustments and for veterans health care. It is particularly important to note what this amendment does regarding an equitable COLA for disabled veterans. The Republican modification of the budget resolution assumes the elimination of COLA for most disabled veterans. It restricts the eligible veteran population very severely. by granting only a 4percent COLA to those veterans who are 70 percent disabled. Thus. only 12 percent of disabled veterans would be eligible for this reduced COLA. Yet social security recipients will receive their 7.4 percent COLA in July. Is this fair to veterans? It is inequitable on the face of it. It is unfair. This arbitrary singlingout of disabled American veterans for a reduced COLA is a disgrace we ought to correct before the budget resolution goes any further. . The veterans of America fulfilled their commitment. and disabled veterans sacrificed for their country. We ought to at least return their commit. ment by giving them the same cot"-ofliving adjustment we are providhig for social security recipients. I urge the adoption of the Chiles amendment.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. Presi- reserved. that the germaneness objecdent. I have an amendment which I tion Is not waived by the unanimous. would call up tonight. consent request?
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Thirty min- serving the right to object. it Is my unutes or less. equally divided. derstanding that If we agree to these
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. reserving the right to object. I would hope if we are going to continue to limit time on amendments that we agree that there will be no seconddegree amendments so we have amendments in the first degree voted on up or down without seconddegree amendments.
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Several of our Members will not be here tomorrow and have said that they would like to vote on the Sasser amendment tonight. Even though I would like to have a vote on my amendment. several of my Members will be gone. But could we not at least have the vote on the Sasser amendment while we have Senators here?
Date: 1982-05-20
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. I do not want to object to the majority leaders request. He can move for it and get a vote on it. I hope we can vote upon the amendment by Mr. SAsSER. Several Senators will have to be gone in the morning. Inasmuch as the figure will again be amendable. this will leave the majority side some recourse. If it saw fit to attempt to amend the figure again. it could do so on tomorrow.
Date: 1982-05-21
Speaker: WILLIAM J. COYNE (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. as we consider the Federal budget for fiscal 1983. we should pause to define our terms. First. we must define what we mean by "spending." A longrunning. specious campaign by the administration has resulted in some AliceinWonderland type of pronouncements as to what "spending" is. Apparently. money for food stamps is "spending." Money for aircraft carriers is not. Money for job traning is "spending." Money for chemical warfare is not. Money for student loans is spending. Money to expand our bulging nuclear arsenal is not. A second term we must define is "tax cut." While much has been made of the supposed "tax cut" made by the administration last year. I would argue that what we have experienced is actually a tax and budget shift. According to a Congressional Budget Office study. 86 percent of the tax "cuts" Congress enacted last year went to families earning more than $20.000. In contrast. twothirds of the spending cuts were borne by families making less than $20.000. It has been noted that in 1980. before the enactment of the admints: tration tax bill. the Exxon Corp. paid about 1.3 percent of its income in Federal taxes. The average working person pays about 10 percent. Many pay more. Did the Congress reduce the burden for the wage earner. while increasing the responsibilities of the oil companies? Just the opposite. In passing the administrations tax bill last year. we provided an additional set of tax breaks to the oil industry. thereby Increasing the tax burden for the average wage earner. The third term that demands definition is "fiscal responsibility." When I opposed the Reagan budget and tax bills last year. I pointed out that we were being asked to spend more money than we hadthe result of sharp increases in the military budget and changes in the tax law to aid the wealthy. The administration prevailed in its argument that the magic of supply side economics would reduce the budget in short order. By the end of Reagans first term it was promised. the budget would be balanced. Believing anything the Office of Management and Budget has to say about balancing budgets Is no longer a serious possibility in this Congress. Let us consider the budgets projected by OMIJ in recent months. noting the pattern that has developed as a result of the administrations own mistaken policies:
Date: 1982-05-21
Speaker: SAM B. HALL (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Administrative Law and Governmental Relations of the Committee on the Judiciary be permitted to sit while the House is reading for amendment under the 5minute rule on Wednesday. May 26. 1982.
Date: 1982-05-21
Speaker: SAM B. HALL (democrat)
Chamber: H

I have now discussed this with the distinguished minority leader. I believe this will take about an hour to an hour and a half at most for testimony that we are going the hear.
Date: 1982-05-21
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. as the majority leader knows. Democratic Senators have been planning for many weeks to use this weekend for an extended retreat conference. I made the majority leader aware of this some time ago and he has attempted to be most accommodating on this point. I appreciate that. because a great deal of planning has gone into this effort. and many Senators have gone to great lengths to rearrange their schedules to be able to attend. It now appears that consideration of this budget resolution may run past our scheduled 2 p.m. departure. I regret this. I particularly regret it because we adjourned earlier than we needed to last night in order to avoid a vote on the Sasser amendment. So T say. Mr. President. that if we have to run beyond the 2 p.m. departure time today. we should do so. As I indicated to the distinguished majority leader last night. as important as the retreat is to our Senators. I want to say very clearly that if those plans must be changed in. order to finish the business on the budget. then so be it. I would hate to abandon or abbreviate the retreat. Even more. I would hate to have the retreat given as the reason for not doing our business in a timely fashion. I make this statement so that there will be no misunderstanding anywhere as to the position that we on this side take in the matter. Whatever is necessary to complete action on the resolution. as it must be done. we are ready to do.
Date: 1982-05-21
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Madam President. " send to the desk my amendmen.. and ask that it be stated by the clerk. I am pleased to be joined in introducing this amendment today by 20 cosponsors. whose names I will read before the clerk stated the resolution: Messrs. SARANEs. RANDOLPH.
Date: 1982-05-21
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Madam President. I ask unanimous consent. having already explained the amendment. that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
Date: 1982-05-21
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Madam President. I want to ask the distinguished Senator from Mississippi a question. I know he is veryhe always isto the committee that has jurisdiction over a subject matter to work Its will on that subject matter. But I want to point out that that committee needs this amount in this budget. else the committee would have to take the amount out of other income assistance brograms such as social security. This amendment does not tell the Committee on Finance how to design the program. This amendment does not do that. All this amendment does is assure that sufficient funds are available for the Committee on Flnance to go forward with a muchneeded emergency extension of unemployment benefits.