macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 2005-04-05
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

And. Mr. Speaker. my colleague is just absolutely right on target. We are more than willing to sit down and hash out in the spirit of compromise. like the gentleman referred to what they did in 1983. But. at least in my experience. with compromise. you have to be singing off the same song sheet. You cannot start from two completely different places and define the problem in completely different ways and ultimately reach compromise. So if the President and his supporters on this concept would come off of the concept of crisis and get to where we are and where the reality is. because every factual description. including from" the Social Security trustees that just released their report 2 weeks ago. points to a problem. a problem looming on the horizon that needs to be dealt with. So when we are singing off the same song sheets. then we will be able to move forward and talk about a compromise that will actually address the solvency question. because private accounts do not address the solvency question. they just cause more debt. What is unbelievable about the private accounts is that the President. at least in my listening to him. has sold them as almost like it would be an addition to your Social Security benefits. But the reality of his vague plan is that you would not get your private account and your Social Security benefits. There would be a commensurate cut in your Social Security benefits in proportion to what is in your account. approximately a 46 percent cut in your Social Security benefits. And let us not forget also that his proposal does not leave out theonethird of Social Security recipients who are not earners. You have people who are beneficiaries of Social Security recipients who have passed on and who are not earning an income. You have children and dependents. and you have the disabled community. Now. they are not able to benefit from private accounts because in order to have a private account. you actually have to have an income. So we are not even thinking about how we would address the huge pure cut that they would suffer from.
Date: 2005-04-05
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. the gentleman is so right. I represent a community where it is not just the poor we are concerned about. it is the regular middle- to lowermiddle class who are struggling. I have hundreds of thousands of senior citizens in south Florida who struggle every single day because Social Security for the vast majority of them is their primary source Of income. They are much more focused. It is what I hear when I am stopped at a picnic or at the supermarket. They are concerned about how they are going to pay for their medication. Some of them cannot even make their copayments. They are concerned about the increase in their. premiums for Medicare that just happened. That is the handwringing that is going on. They are not that concerned about a problem that does not face them for another 37 years. Quite honestly. in the senior citizen community. most of them realize 37 years is not something they are going to have to worry about. But 2017 is when the Medicare trustee report says is the point at which we would literally be paying out more in Medicare benefits than we are bringing in in premiums. That is a serious problem.
Date: 2005-04-05
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

And the report said gross misrepresentation. grossly inaccurate facts when it comes to reports of there being weapons of mass destruction.
Date: 2005-04-05
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I want to ask the gentleman because the gentleman was here. The thing I talked about and heard about on the campaign trail last year was how we ended up with a Medicare bill that added a prescription drug benefit but did not allow. in fact prohibited. the negotiation of discounts for prescription drugs. I know that the VA. the Veterans Administration. already has that ability and drugs made available to our veterans through the VA are significantly less than they are on the private market. So maybe the gentleman can help clarify that for me because I was not here. People out in the real world do not understand that.
Date: 2005-04-05
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I thought it was very interesting that just last week the former Secretary of Health and Human Services. Tommy Thompson. in a speech to the Kaiser Foundation said it was his biggest frustration in the negotiations on the Medicare prescription drug reform bill because he believed the Secretary should have that ability. that the Secretary. just like they do in the VA. should have the ability to negotiate those discounts. and it absolutely ties the hands of the Health and Human Services Secretary. In talking about this in his speech to the Kaiser Foundation. he said. unfortunately. membership of the leadership of his party. including the President. did not agree. and he was not able to get through to them that that was an important component. to reduce those prices. What we have here is we have a Social Security plan. or an outline of a plan. that is going to harm young people and hopefully not harm older people who are imminently collecting .benefits or already collecting benefits. It is hard to get young people to think about when they are going to collect Social Security. We are having town hall meetings for younger people and trying to get them to come. and talk to them about why they should think about this. because it is not looming on the horizon of their lives. And then we have Medicare. We also with our generation have a group of people who just are not thinking about whether Medicare will be there for them. They just feel like they are invincible. and there are no major health care issues for most people in our generation. We have got to make sure that we continue to pound the drum on this issue and talk to as many people as we can. because if we do not. we will all get caught asleep at the switch. As a result. this train will run smack into a wall at the point in our lives when we do need to worry about it.
Date: 2005-04-05
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Just a couple. because I think we again need to maybe finish up by zeroing in on the impact that this proposed privatization scheme would have. The private accounts do not make up for the 46 percentcut in benefits that would be part of this proposal. A 20yearold who enters the workforce this year would lose about $152.000 in Social Security benefits under the Bush proposal. Social Security provides disability insurance that young families need. and .there is no private insurance plan that can compete with the Social Security disability benefits that are offered. The cost of those benefits bought privately would be beyond most peoples ability to pay for them. For a worker in her midtwenties with a spouse and two children. Social Security provides the equivalent of a $350.000 disability insurance policy. again not one that most people can afford to pay out of pocket for. And suppose. God forbid. you have a young parent that dies suddenly. Social Security provides for the children who are left behind. Social Se�curity survivors benefits will replace as much as 80 percent of the earnings for a 25yearold averagewage worker who dies leaving two children and a young spouse. For that parent. Social Security survivors benefits are equivalent to a $403.000 life insurance policy. What we have been trying to do in our Thirtysomething- Working Group is explain to our generation what the reality would be in their lives without Social Security as a continued safety net.
Date: 2005-04-06
Speaker: GENE GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. I rise today in support of H. Res. 190. which honors the life and achievements of Pope John Paul II. Pope John Paul II was a man of devout faith who used his leadership to help the poor. mediate conflicts around the world. and fight tyranny. As a man who fought both the Nazi and the Communist regime in Poland in pursuit of his own faith. he was a strong advocate for religious tolerance and freedom. His lifes work is truly inspiring to all of us. As the most traveled Pope in history. Pope John Paul II visited more than 120 countries and traveled approximately three quarter of a million miles. During these visits he worked to bring peace to regions of the world that were in conflict. He embraced the poor and the oppressed across the world by encouraging us to help those who are less fortunate. His hope for a better world for those who had nothing should remind us all as Pope John Paul II said to "practice mercy heroically with the lowliest and the most deprived." Pope John Paul II was able to rise above political and religious conflict to deliver a message of peace. love. and faith all while promoting equality for all.
Date: 2005-04-06
Speaker: CORRINE BROWN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Mr. Speaker. the EPA is trying to exploit the poor people in my district for their pseudoNazi and Tuskeegeelike studies to determine what pesticides do to infants and toddlers in Duval County Florida. In October. the EPA received $2.1 million to do the study from the American Chemistry Council. a chemical industry front group that includes members such as Dow. Exxon. and Monsanto Critics of the research. including some EPA scientists. claim the studys funders guarantee the results will be biased in favor of the chemical industry. at the expense of the health of the impoverished children serving as test subjects. The families would have to keep spraying. even when the directions on the bottles say "cover all food and keep pets and children outside and away from the pesticides." The point of the study is to determine what happens to children exposed to pesticides. There is no reason to believe that the participants would be informed about incorrect use of pesticides that would abnormally affect the children. Any change in pesticide use would skew the results. In fact. EPA policy recommends that children be kept away from all pesticides because all pose some health risks. But the agency will not be warning parents in this study group. Doing so would interfere with the study. Infants and toddlers up to 3 years in age are. involved. and the agency will warn their parents of the pesticide danger only if their children begin to show risky levels of pesticides in their unne. There are no safeguards to prevent a family from increasing their pesticides use to become eligible for the study. This is a low income area. $970 over two years. plus a video camcorder is a lot of money to many people. The EPA Press Release for this study said: "As part of this exposure study. the American Chemistry Council (ACC) has signed a cooperative research agreement with EPA to collect information on exposures of young children to several household chemicals. including phthalates. brominated flame retardants. and perfluorinated chemicals." These classes of chemicals have been shown to have effects on male sperm counts in adults. and are known to be dangerous. The European Union is in the process of banning these drugs. This project is symptomatic of a larger problem. This administration has been pushing to increase human testing. American kids should not be guinea pigs for a misguided administration proposal to help the large pesticide companies increase sales.
Date: 2005-04-13
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Madam Speaker. I rise today to pay tribute to the honorable Dan Pearl. Mayor. Pearl retired in 1972 to the town of Sunrise. Florida. in Broward County after having served 30 years as a parole officer with the New York Division of Parole. In 1979. he was first elected to the Sunrise City Council and later served as mayor and deputy mayor. It was during his tenure as mayor that Sunrise made the transition from a strongmayor system to a professionalized city government administered by a city manager. In appreciation of his tireless service to his community. county officials took the unprecedented step of naming the Oakland Park Boulevard Library after Mayor Pearl in 1993. Those of us who had the pleasure of working with Mayor Pearl will always remember his contributions and insights as a public servant. He was a member of numerous boards and organizations. including the Florida League of Cities. the Gold Coast League of Cities. the Broward Planning Council. the South Florida Regional Planning Council. and the American Cancer Society. His death in 1996 was a tremendous loss to his family. colleagues. and the citizens of south Florida. but we will always remember the warmth. sincerity. and friendliness of Dan Pearl that he shared with everyone. On behalf of the people of south Florida. it is my honor to salute the life and legacy of Mayor Dan Pearl.
Date: 2005-04-13
Speaker: CORRINE BROWN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Mr. Speaker. I rise today to comment on the Republicans priorities. Many of them talk about protecting veterans and making sure that veterans have the support they need when they return from protecting this countrys freedom in Iraq. Today the House passed H.R. 8 to make permanent the repeal of the estate tax. This bill will cost the American taxpayers $295 billion over the next 10 years. The cost on the first 2 years could go as high as $1 trillion. This bill gives a tax break to the wealthiest threetenths of 1 percent of estates. while imposing a new capital gains tax on most of us. including small business owners and farmers. At the same time. the Republicans passed -a budget that calls for $800 million in cuts to the VA over the next 5 years. Clearly. the Republicans are attempting to balance the budget on the backs of the veterans. Tomorrow. this same House will vote on bankruptcy legislation that does not protect our veterans. Many of our servicemembers. especially the citizen soldiers of the Guard and the Reserve forces. face terrible financial problems because they do not qualify for a narrow protection of debt incurred while on duty if S. 256 becomes law. Since 9/11. approximately half a million Reservists and Guardsmen have been called to active duty. some more than once. Hundreds of thousands of Reservists and National Guardsmen are currently activated n support of the ongoing military operations. According to the National Guard. four out of 10 members of the National Guard and Reservist forces lose income when they / leave their civilian jobs for active duty. The people of this country need to see what policies the Republicans actually Vote for. They talk the talk very well. but they do not walk the walk or roll the roll for our veterans who have sacrificed their bodies for this Nation. Today. the gentleman from Illinois
Date: 2005-04-14
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. I rise in opposition to S.256 because the bill does nothing to address the epidemic of identity theft or protect its victims.
Date: 2005-04-14
Speaker: CORRINE BROWN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Mr. Speaker. I rise in opposition to S. 256 because this bill does nothing to protect our heroic Reservists and Guard who are fighting for us every day in war.
Date: 2005-04-14
Speaker: ZOE LOFGREN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. on rollcall No. 106. I had turned off my pager during a committee meeting and neglected to turn it back on. When the vote was called. therefore. I did not learn of it. Had I been present. I would have voted. "nay."
Date: 2005-04-14
Speaker: ZOE LOFGREN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. this bill hurts Americans. One group who will be especially hurt are family forced into bankruptcy because of a medical crisis. A recent study conducted by professors at Harvard Medical and Law School showed that about half of all personal bankruptcies can be attributed to medical costs. Among those who cited illnesses as a cause of bankruptcy. the average unreimbursed medical costs totaled nearly $12.000 even though more than threequarters had health insurance. How does the bill hurt the families? Under the bill for the first time there will be a presumption that many of these families abuse the bankruptcy system..Under current law. people facing a medical bankruptcy can seek several forms of relief. Chapter 7 is by far the most common. Under 7 debtors are required to forfeit all of their property other than the exempt assets in exchange for having their debts extinguished. Current law already gives bankruptcy courts discretion to deny chapter 7 relieve where the filing is found to be a substantial abuse. But unlike this bill. current law provides a presumption in favor of granting relief to the debtor. The other option is chapter 13 where a debtor is required to continue paying creditors. This makes it more difficult for debtors to get back on their feet. This bill will hurt families facing medical bankruptcy because it will force many of them into chapter 13. That is because it presumes that these families are abusing the bankruptcy system if they fail the means test. The means tests starts with a familys income and then subtracts monthly expenses permitted by IRS guidelines. But instead of using a debtors actual projected income. the means tests uses the debtors average income over the prior 6 months. Thus. if a familys bankruptcy was triggered by a loss of income resulting from a serious illness. the means test would still attribute the lost income for the purpose of determining whether the family is abusing the bankruptcy system. Further. the means test uses the median income for a State. My constituents in Santa Clara County live in a highcost area. Almost nobody will be able to discharge their debts in bankruptcy from Santa Clara County because of that high cost. no matter how meritorious for their claim for relief. Similarly. instead of using the debtors actual expenses. the inflexible guidelines developed by the IRS is used. As a result. more families facing medical bankruptcy will be presumed to be abusing the system. will be forced into chapter 13 and will never be able to stand on their feet again. That is not right. The Harvard study found that these struggling families did everything they could to pay their medical bills to avoid bankruptcy. One in five skipped meals. Onethird had their electricity cut off. Almost half lost their phone service. One in five was forced to move. Incredibly. they also cut back on needed medications to try to avoid bankruptcy. In fact. half went without needed prescriptions. And a full 60 percent went without a needed doctor appointment. Please join me in opposing this uifair bill. [From Market Watch]
Date: 2005-04-14
Speaker: LINDA T. SANCHEZ (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Mr. Speaker. I rise in strong opposition to the socalled Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005. Contrary to its name. this bill does not protect consumers and it certainly does not help honest. hardworking families with financial problems. The only thing that this bill does is distort our bankruptcy laws so that working families are treated more like criminals than people in need of relief. Our bankruptcy laws must strike a fair and practical balance between debtors and creditors. This means that honest people with financial troubles can make a fresh start by getting creditors off their backs. But this bill does the exact opposite of that. Instead. of helping struggling families in debt. this bill erects harsh legal and monetary roadblocks for people who are trying to file bankruptcy. The vast majority of people who file for bankruptcy. 9 out of 10. do so because they have either lost their job. suffered a medical emergency. or there has been a divorce or separation in their family. These are not people who are abusing the bankruptcy system. We are talking about recentlr divorced. single working mothers trying to support their children who may not be getting their child support. We are talking about young men and women in our Armed Forces returning home after serving their country in Iraq. We are talking about some of the 1.6 million families who have lost their privatesector jobs since 2001 when a Republican administration took over the White House. These are honest. hardworking families who have resorted to bankruptcy to find some relief for their debts and a chance to start their lives anew. This is a terrible bill. It is harmful to struggling families and goes against the basic policy of our bankruptcy laws. helping families in financial trouble get a fresh start. I urge every Member of the House to stand by Americas working families by voting no for passage of S. 256.
Date: 2005-04-14
Speaker: GENE GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr Speaker. I rise today in opposition to this bill. This bill will weaken homestead protections currently in place under state laws. hurting my constituents. the citizens of Texas. and the citizens of any other states that have laws protecting individuals homes valued over $125.000. which is the limit this bill sets. Texas. which has the longest and oldest history of homestead protection laws in our country. has no cap on homestead protection. along with Kansas. Iowa. Florida. and South Dakota. Minnesota. Rhode Island. and Nevadas laws protect home equity of $200.000. Property values across the nation vary widely. The median resale price of a home in California is $215.000. In Nebraska its $70.200. While I understand there must be a sensible cap on exemptible home equity to ensure the law is not protecting million dollar mansions. $125.000 is unreasonable given the skyrocketing price of real estate in Texas and many other parts of the country. This bill will make bankruptcy even more expensive and burdensome than it already is. on hardworking Americans who have fallen on hard times and seniors on fixed incomes. while doing nothing to address the out of control lending practices by credit card companies. Mr. Speaker. I cannot support a bill that will hurt hardworking Texans. and I oppose this bill.
Date: 2005-04-14
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE (democrat)
Chamber: H

J Texas and Messrs. RUSH. JOHNSON of Illinois ch vote from "nay" to "yea." So the motion to recorr jected. The result of the vote wa as above recorded. Stated for:
Date: 2005-04-14
Speaker: CORRINE BROWN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Mr. Speaker. today we introduced a bipartisan Amtrak reauthorization bill that will truly serve Americas traveling public. I want to thank the gentleman from Alaska (Chairman YOUNG). the gentleman from Ohio . and the ranking member. the gentleman from Minnesota
Date: 2005-04-19
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

led the Pledge 6f Allegiance as follows: I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America. and to the Republic for which it stands. one nation under God. indivisible. with liberty and justice for all.
Date: 2005-04-19
Speaker: EDDIR BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. the energy bill we are about to debate this week is presented as a major step forward in American energy policy. But it is not. It is quite the opposite. This bill does nothing to improve the environment of this country or cut down on ozone pollution exposure. This bill does not force big polluters to clean up. Rather. it provides billions of dollars in tax breaks to politically favored energy industries that do not deserve them at a time when the country can ill afford it. Mr. Speaker. the State of Texas ranks number one among other States in per capita consumption of electricity and second in ozone pollution exposure. Last year Childrens Hospital of Dallas had 4.000 emergency department visits for treatment of asthma attacks. The average age of these kids was 5 years old. More and more. there are hospitalizations. More and more. there are deaths from the pollution that we suffer in Texas. and I will offer an amendment to try and correct it. But. Mr. Speaker. I know that probably I am in the minority. but we must clean up the environment.