macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 2016-06-09
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I yield myself such time as I may consume. I will point out that title 8 of the U.S. Code specifically references the term "illegal aliens." The purpose of referencing it that way in this legislation is specifically so that the majority can require the Library of Congress to continue to use the term "illegal alien" in their subject heading. We are being a little too cute by half here. and we are simply not going to let the majority get away with it. I will also point out that Congressman JOAQUIN CASTRO is the sponsor of legislation that would do exactly what the chairman just suggested. He has legislation that would change the term "illegal alien" in title 8 of the U.S. Code. Instead of dealing with a political issue in the midst of an unrelated appropriations bill. we should allow the legislative process to work under regular order and have that bill move through the process. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2016-06-09
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I yield myself such time as I may consume. I will point out that it is not a criminal act to be in the United States as an immigrant. The suggestion in the 21st century that the term "illegal alien" is an appropriate one is similar to suggesting that we continue to use the term "Negro." We evolve in this country. and it is understandable that someone who was not a member of a group of immigrants wouldnt understand that that term could feel pejorative. So we. as a responsible body. should evolve as society evolves. To continue to insist that the Library of Congress by law use a pejorative term that they have been petitioned to change by the American Library Association so that researchers can search for the appropriate term when they are doing research is truly unbelievable. To be so committed to racist and bigoted terms that really have no place in the Legislative Branch Appropriations bill is outrageous. That is why this language should have been deleted. I think it is truly unfortunate that the majority did not have at least the courage to allow my amendment and Congressman CASTROS amendment to be made in order so that we could have a proper debate on this subject on the floor of the House of Representatives. I will point out and remind the chairman that my amendment that would have done just that only was defeated in the Appropriations Committee by one vote. So this is not a slam dunk when it comes to your side of the aisle either. It would have been nice to give your colleagues an opportunity to have had that discussion. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2016-06-09
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chair. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Before we passed the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act in the 1960s and when we had the Jim Crow laws. which were an unfortunate stain on our history. there were plenty of people who said that the laws that were in place were doing a favor to Negroes. which is the way they were referred to at the time. For the chairman to suggest that we are doing the Library of Congress a favor by requiring them to continue to use a term that they have been petitioned to stop using. "illegal alien." is insensitive. inappropriate. outdated. and political. This is the Legislative Branch Appropriations bill. We are supposed to be discussing how to fund the functions of the legislative branch. and we have just spent an extraordinary amount of time debating the immigration debate that has been raging in this country for far too long. I guess I shouldnt be surprised that the majority believes that we should continue to label people as "illegal." People arent illegal. Acts that are committed are illegal. but people are not illegal. Mr. Chair. That is. simply. why the American Library Association. the umbrella policy organization for libraries across this country. has petitioned the Library of Congress to change the use of the term "illegal alien." What the majority is doing here. as I said. is setting Congress up as the word police. Where are we going to stop? There are thousands of subject headings that they change at the Library of Congress every year. I cant imagine how many pages this bill will be when we start referencing and spending time arguing over what they call each of those. It is inappropriate. it is unacceptable. it is a complete waste of time. It injects politics into a bill that usually and. most often. doesnt have it. It is unfortunate that the funding of the Planned Parenthood select committee and that the funding of the Benghazi Select Committee have continued to politicize a bill that should. simply. be an effort for us to make sure that we can sustain the most significant beacon of democracy that the world has ever seen. Mr. Chair. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2016-06-09
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Is it not appropriate for the ranking member and the chairman. when we are debating. to go through the Chair when we are having that debate?
Date: 2016-06-09
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chair. I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would point out that the gentleman from Georgia is absolutely correct. I did raise that concern. and I thought it was appropriate to raise the concern that the way the majority meant the term "ObamaCare." as applied at the time. was intended to be pejorative. Then President Obama embraced the term. so we evolved because President Obama decided that he liked that his name would be associated with making sure that 20 million people who now have health insurance but who didnt before would be associated with his name. That is all that the American Library Association and the Library of Congress are asking with regard to the people who are labeled as "illegal aliens." The gentleman from Georgia. it would be understood. is not someone who is labeled that way. so. perhaps. it is understandable that he would not understand why that was offensive. The American Library Association and the Library of Congress have recognized that the evolution beyond using a term that has been determined to be pejorative is essential. That is called progress. That is called tolerance. Unfortunately. the Legislative Branch Appropriations bill. through the reference to title VIII in the United States Code. requires. in this bill. the Library of Congress to continue to use the term "illegal alien." It is inappropriate. unfortunate. and it should be deleted. We should have had an opportunity to debate an amendment to have allowed that to happen. The majority chooses to hide the fact. I mean. I wish they would have just owned up to it. Mr. Chair. they should have just put it right up in the bill. I dont know why they didnt. If they think it is the right thing to do. they should have just put that term right in the bill and spelled out that they expect the Library of Congress to continue to use it. Hiding behind title VIII of the U.S. Code shows that they dont have. necessarily. the courage of their convictions to stand up for that term. Why? Because there are a whole lot of people in this country who think it is offensive. including me and the Members of my party. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2016-06-09
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chair. I yield myself such time as I may consume. What I suggested was that. because the majority realizes that the term "illegal alien" is not something that is appropriate to continue to use as a subject heading. if they had spelled it straight out in the bill rather than hiding what their true intention was behind the reference to the U.S. Code. they probably would have had to have answered a little bit more closely to the fact that they were making this effort. Now we have been able to at least have this discussion. and I am intentionally using most of my time to be able to shine a spotlight on the fact that the majority wishes to continue to label people as "illegal." wishes to continue to politicize the legislative branch appropriations bill to inject the immigration debate into the funding of the legislative branch. and to set themselves up as the word police with regard to subject headings. This is what we need our colleagues to wrap their minds around. Mr. Chairrequiring the Library to continue to use an offensive term in their subject headings so that researchers cant use the term that the American Library Association has deemed more appropriate and not offensive. Instead. they insist on continuing to use an offensive term. That is unacceptable. It is inappropriate. We are going to continue to insist. and I will not be able to support this legislation as a result of the insistence of the majority on labeling an entire group of people "illegal" and politicizing this bill when the Library of Congress should be allowed to let the process work that works for thousands of other changes to their subject headings. I will also point out. Mr. Chairman. that we do embrace evolution of terminology here. Just in May. a few weeks ago. we finally deleted the last vestiges of the terms "Oriental" and "Negro" from the United States Code. So we do have a process by which we take legislation like that that has been introduced by Congressman JOAQUIN CASTRO. and we allow it to move through the process. That is the appropriate way that we deal with discussion about changes in terminology in the code. We dont do it in the legislative branch bill. And that is exactly what the majority is doing by insisting that the Library of Congress continue to use that offensive term "illegal alien." I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2016-06-09
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I yield myself the balance of my time to close. I think it is unfortunate that myself and my colleagues on our side of the aisle dont feel that we can lend our support to this legislation for a variety of reasons. First. there has been an overwhelming injection of politics into what should be an otherwise solid piece of legislation in which we have done a lot of good work to make sure that the functions of the legislative branch are able to make sure that we can exercise our roles and responsibilities as Members of the legislative branch. Unfortunately. due to the funding of the select committee on Planned Parenthood. which continues the witch hunt into an organization that simply exists to provide millions of women access to quality health care. in which there has been absolutely no evidence whatsoever that there was any wrongdoing. the majority continues to insist on funding the witch hunt that is designed to prevent women from getting access to quality. affordable health care. It also continues funding for the Select Committee on Benghazi. an investigation in which the majority has actually admitted that they found absolutely no wrongdoing. Yet they have not disbanded the committee. and they continue to provide funding for it in this bill. Lastly. as we have been able to spend a few minutes debating here on the floor. this bill tragically sets the legislative branch up as the word police and Members of Congress as the watchful sentries over the uses of the terms and subject headings at the Library of Congress. I am glad that we are really carefully protecting the card catalog in the Library of Congress to make sure that we can continue to use offensive terms when researchers look them up in the Library of Congress. like "illegal alien." This bill makes sure that. instead of evolving. instead of moving forward. instead of letting professionals who work in libraries decide what terms should be used in their subject headings. Congress is going to establish ourselves as the word police. politicize something where we should not inject politics. and label people as "illegal." Again. I will reiterate that there should have been an opportunity for us to debate this issue separately. I am glad we have had an opportunity to discuss it here and to expose the majority for wanting to continue a bigoted. offensive term as the subject heading in the Library of Congress. I yield back the balance of my time.
Date: 2016-06-09
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chair. I support my colleagues amendment. The aim of this amendment is to create an office of good jobs for the House within the Office of the Chief Administrative Officer. This office would help ensure that the House makes contracting and employment decisions. encouraging the creation of decently paid jobs. implementation of fair labor practices. and responsible employment practices. As the legislative branch. we ought to be setting an example for the Nation when it comes to contracting decisions. Members of Congress who are committed to creating goodpaying jobs and supporting workers have a chance with this amendment to see those values reflected right where we work. This office will help guide the legislative branch in making responsible contracting and employment decisions and do right by the countless men and women who help us perform the peoples business each and every day. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment by voting "yes."
Date: 2016-06-09
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I join the chairman in supporting the gentlemans amendment. This amendment would add approximately 30 lactation rooms to the Capitol complex. Working mothers rely on these roomsand I can speak from experienceto ensure that they can continue to work while breastfeeding their children. This amendment rightfully recognizes that Congress must lead by example to ensure that women can be both moms and leaders in their field. In fact. my own office right now is serving as a lactation room. and that is because one of my wonderful staff is a nursing mom. While I am happy to do that. it is our responsibility to maintain an environment where all of our employees feel comfortable. including working mothers. Our staff deserves to feel welcome and secure when they are ready to return to work. We should be doing everything we can to encourage working moms to return to the workplace. and it must start here on Capitol Hill. As we all know. the offices in which we work are inadequate for moms to pump. Our staff is many to an office with openair cubicles. Having lactation rooms is mandatory. essential. if we want to keep talented women in the workplace. I want to thank the gentleman for offering this amendment. I urge its support and appreciate the chairmans support.
Date: 2016-06-09
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I strongly oppose this amendment. as it takes a meatax approach to cutting this bill by $31 million with an acrosstheboard cut of 1 percent. The amendment exempts the Capitol Police and its buildings. as well as the Sergeant at Arms. It does not exempt our staff. including the offerers own staff because it would cut the Members Representational Allowance. It would also cut the Congressional Research Service. the Government Accountability Office. the Congressional Budget Office. committees of Congress. and the Office of Compliance. The Legislative Branch bill. Mr. Chairman. has been flat for 3 years. And this bill finally provides a modest overall increase of 2.1 percent. but because we have not kept up with inflation. each year we are buying less and less for our dollar. The Congressional Research Service. for example. is still below FY 2010 levels and reports it has lost 13 percent of its purchasing power. We cant continue to do more with less. There is a reason the perception of Congress is damaged. We are damaging our ability to write and analyze legislation and have serious debates because we take the politically expedient route. like the acrosstheboard cuts. because they play well during town halls. But if we bothered to explain the brain drain within the halls of Congress and the need to boost funding for staff to do oversight. I have the belief that our constituents would understand that. If Members want a strong legislative branch to ensure oversight of the executive. this amendment should be defeated. The cut to the MRA is one of the most egregious that would result from this amendment. I happen to think my staff contributes to the wellbeing of my constituents and are worth every penny we can afford to pay them after years of cuts to the MRA. The MRA is $97 million less than it was in fiscal year 2010. This amendment would cut $5.6 million more. Mr. Chairman. you get the government you pay for. and I fear that this amendment would do nothing more than hurt the service we are able to provide to our constituents. I urge defeat of the amendment. Mr. Chairman. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2016-06-09
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. as I said. this bill has already taken hit after hit. We are far below the levels that we were at in 2010. We have employees who deserve to be assured that we have enough respect for their professionalism that we are going to adequately fund their ability to do their jobs. which is to represent our constituents. This amendment takes. as I said. a meatax approach rather than what the chairman and I worked together to do. which is to develop the substantive portions of this bill related to the funding of the legislative branch in a precisionlike way. It doesnt make sense. I have never heard of polling that actually asks generic questions of constituents on whether they like or dislike acrosstheboard cuts. I am not sure what the purpose of electing Members of Congress is if we are going to just make indiscriminate. acrosstheboard decisions rather than use our brains and build consensus around the decisions that we make. That is the type of approach that this amendment would take. and it is inappropriate. We need to make sure that we are adequately funding the legislative branch functions so that we can represent our constituents effectively. Mr. Chairman. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2016-06-09
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. the American people are appreciative and understand that we have been through 75 straight months of private sector job growth. that we have added 20 million people who didnt have health insurance before and who are now able to go to the doctor when they are sick. that we have cut the deficit by nearly threequarters. and that we have made progress. And we need to continue to build on that progress and help more Americans have an opportunity to reach the middle class. All of those things were accomplished through funding the legislative branch. And we need to appropriately fund it. adequately fund it. so we can effectively represent our constituents. I urge defeat of this illadvised amendment. Mr. Chairman. I yield back the balance of my time. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Tennessee .
Date: 2016-06-09
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I demand a recorded vote. The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII. further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from Tennessee will be postponed. The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 7 printed in House Report 114611.
Date: 2016-06-09
Speaker: WATSON COLEMAN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject of my Special Order.
Date: 2016-06-09
Speaker: WATSON COLEMAN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I am thrilled to be here on the floor of the House this evening with my Congressional Progressive Caucus and LGBT Equality Caucus as we join millions of Americans around the country in celebrating Pride Month. Pride Month offers an opportunity to celebrate the incredible achievements of the LGBT community and the progress we have made toward a society that accepts LGBT Americans as equals. It is a chance to honor the trailblazers and leaders that have contributed so much to the lives of LGBT individuals worldwide. And it gives us the space to remind one another that we are all humans. deserving of dignity. acceptance. and equal treatment.
Date: 2016-06-09
Speaker: WATSON COLEMAN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I thank my colleague for his eloquent and inspiring words and encouragement. And I. too. think that this is a metamorphosing body. and I just pray sooner than later. Mr. Speaker. I yield to the gentleman from New York .
Date: 2016-06-09
Speaker: WATSON COLEMAN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I want to thank the gentleman from New York for his words and for taking the time to share what I think is a very important issue. Mr. Speaker. I yield to the gentlewoman from the great State of California . my c01league.
Date: 2016-06-09
Speaker: LORETTA SANCHEZ (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Cali

fornia. Mr. Speaker. I would like to thank the gentlewoman from New Jersey for reserving this hour of time for us to talk about something that is incredibly important. the LGBTQ Pride Month. It is just remarkable to look back just in the time that I have been here in the Congress to see the equality that has come about in these years. Just 8 years ago. in my home State of California. there was a proposition to prohibit gay marriage. and it passed. When proposition 8 passed. it was really heartbreaking for not only Californias LGBTQ community and its allies. but really for our families because. quite honestly. every family in some way or another is connected. We have family members who belong to the LGBT community. But we didnt let this be a setback to us. Like other Americans. LGBTQ Californians believed that they deserved equality under the eyes of the law. So in July of 2013. the Supreme Court finally struck down core components of the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act law that was passed right before I got to the Congress. This important ruling made proposition 8 null and void. returning marriage equality back to my great State of California. Last year. the Supreme Court guaranteed an individuals right to marry whomever they love regardless of sex. The Supreme Court recognized what we have known for a long time. that it is wrong to deprive citizens of the right to marry the loves of their lives. They recognize that to do so would be to treat samesex couples like second class citizens. Equality. fairness. and love won in the highest court of this Nation. In our military. LGBTQ servicemembers have also achieved remarkable progress towards equality and ending antiLGBTQ discrimination. Just 5 years ago. an LGBTQ American could not proudly serve their country in the military. But since the repeal of Dont Ask. Dont Tell. our LGBTQ servicemembers are now able to serve openly in our military. What a great day. While we celebrate this extraordinary progress. we also have to recognize that we still have a ways to go. There are many States in our country where you can be fired from your job simply because you are gay. Across the country and in Congress. we are still seeing discrimination. discrimination. discrimination. Under our current laws. LGBTQ Americans arent guaranteed the vital protections against discrimination. That is why I am a proud sponsor of the Equality Act. It is time for Congress to pass this essential civil rights legislation. So. once again. I want to thank my colleague from New Jersey for celebrating today and to understand that regardless of sexual orientation. all Americans deserve life. liberty. and the pursuit of happiness.
Date: 2016-06-09
Speaker: WATSON COLEMAN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I want to thank my colleague from California. Mr. Speaker. I yield to the gentlewoman from California . Congresswoman SPEIER is another colleague from the great State of California.