macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 2005-11-01
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

The gentleman is absolutely right. It would be one thing if they could look us right in the eye and look the American people in the eye and their own constituents and say. I have consistently been voting exactly the way I feel. The votes I have cast go to the core of my principles. and I have always voted how I believe. Only we know that not to be true. They could not possibly do that. They cannot have town hall meetings in their districts and look their folks in the eye and say. I have always voted. my own convictions. because we have watched the read lights change to green lights. and the green rights change back to red lights. We watched this board over here.
Date: 2005-11-01
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Oh. my God. puking blood. It is just unbelievable. They have this timer. that they set with 5minute votes that turn into 40minute votes. like the energy bill. I was not here. but the Medicare bill. a 15minute vote. over 3 hours. And all the while our vote board with our names up here in lights. armtwisting. bloodpuking. the green turning to red. yes to no. and literally the angst that I have watched on some of my colleagues faces knowing they want to cast their vote with how they truly believe. but they care more about the money continuing to flow. about the chairmanships continuing to come their way. and about the appropriations continuing to remain in the budget. 0I 2245 It is all about them. And when I ran for office. I thought it was supposed to be about the people I represented. That is why I came here. I am not sure why they came here. They have made it pretty clear. but I know that it is obvious that we came here for different reasons than they did.
Date: 2005-11-01
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. So I commend the Members for comSpeaker. if the gentleman will yield. ing to the floor. I am glad the genthe most troubling aspect of what he tleman from Ohio has just said is the question why will they claimed this hour. and I think we have .not admit that they made a mistake. to do the things we must do within our And the troubling aspect of that is that power to stand up for those individuals. they did not make a mistake. It was Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker. redeliberate. There is a strong possi- claiming my time. I would also like to bility. given all the things we talked thank everyone for being here for the about here tonight. that they took us 30something Group. into war because they wanted to take And I want to make one final point us into war. because they had some because we have heard this on the talk grand plan. They had motivation. They shows from a lot of different sources had "war fever." as the gentleman ref- about the CIA leak: Well. they went erenced earlier that Colin Powell indi- after Libby for outiig a CIA agent. and cated that Vice President CHENEY had. they only got him on perjury and false The ability to admit mistaker when statements -and obstruction of justice. one believes they made them. but one And as we close here. I want to just rehas to first believe they made one. iterate what the prosecutor said. He That is kind of the first rule. And the said. I am the umpireand as I am trylack of capacity to acknowledge that ing to umpire the game here and figure they made mistakes is just aston- out exactly what is going on. by their ishing. It really is. and -they continue committing perjury. they were throwto astonish us on this floor and the ing dirt in my eye. American people. So maybe someone will end up get-
Date: 2005-11-02
Speaker: ZOE LOFGREN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. I yield to Speaker. I did opine at the hearings. the gentleman from Massachusetts. since there was complete agreement Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. among all of the Members present. that Speaker. again. invoking one other inwe did not want to regulate the Inter- dividual does not pass for subsiantive net. that we might be able to take care debate. I am surprised. Do you not unof this on the suspension calendar. derstand what real argument is?And I never have felt so powerful in Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. the minority as I do today. Speaker. I yield 4 minutes to the gen-
Date: 2005-11-02
Speaker: ZOE LOFGREN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. up under suspension.. Sleaker. I was the only Democrat Ms. ZOE LOFGREN of California. Mr. -present. Speaker. I thank the gentlewoman for
Date: 2005-11-02
Speaker: CORRINE BROWN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Mr. Speaker. I want to thank Chairman BUYER and Ranking Member EVANS for bringing this important bill to the attention of the House of Representatives. This legislation will empower the chief information officer of the Department of Veterans Affairs to control and influence information technology in the Department. I fully support H.R. 4061 and am very pleased to be an original cosponsor. This bill helps the Department of Veterans Affairs construct a balanced. responsive. and accountable system to manage information technology at VA. As we have all seen from the emergencies that have recently affected this country. it is important for all of the computers to be able to communicate with each other in every region. A veteran- needs to know that he or she will be served when they enter any VA facility. Under this bill. we are taking the first steps to make sure this happens. I encourage my colleagues to approve this legislation.
Date: 2005-11-03
Speaker: ZOE LOFGREN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I rise in support of the bill. Mr. Chairman. as a member of the House Judiciary Committee I had the opportunity to review .quite carefully this bill. While I disagreed with the Supreme Court decision. I must confess that the bill before us today is not drafted as carefully and clearly as I would have hoped. There will. in all likelihood. be litigation if this bill becomes law because the exemptions are written in such a way that reasonable people may disagree as t9 their meaning. I hope that I can help clarify the application of this bill in at least one area: The meaning of the bill as it relates to affordable housing. What follows are the concurring views in the Committee Report -accompanying this bill. It is my hope that by including them here today during our floor debate that in the future this clarification will be of value to public entities. litigants and the courts. At markup. I intended to offer an amendment to this legislation creating an exception to the definition of "economic development" for the developmentof affordable housing for lowincome residents. I ultimately decided not to offer this amendment. however. based on my recognition. and the apparent recognition of my colleagues. that this bill as introduced does not in any way limit the ability of States and local governments to exercise their eminent domain powers for the building of affordable housing for lowincome residents. In fact. during markup. I pointedthis out and received no objections from my colleagues. The provision of lowincome housing. whether by a forprofit or a nonprofit entity. should not constitute "economic development" under the definition in this bill because such activity constitutes neither "commercial enterprise" nor an activity designed to "increase tax revenue. tax base. employment or general economic health." Rather. the development of affordable housing for lowincome residents constitutes a traditional public purpose for which eminent domain powers have long been recognized. Given that this bill will not in any way limit the exercise of eminent domain powers for the development of affordable housing. I concur in the Committees report.
Date: 2005-11-03
Speaker: GENE GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Chairman. I thank my colleague for yielding me time. Mr. Chairman. I am proud to be a cosponsor of H.R. 4128 and glad to rise in support of it. The Private Property Rights Protection Act prohibits States and localities from using eminent domain powers for economic development purposes if the State or local governing jurisdiction received Federal economic development funds during the same year. In the past. governments were only able to acquire property from private owners if the property was going to be used for real public use. highways. roads. schools. parks. or to eliminate that property from endangering the public. These transactions have typically not -occurred when the government buys a property by the power of eminent domain from a private owner and then sells the property to a different private owner under the premise that the property would benefit the community with increased economic development. We all support economic development. but if a community wants to do that. they need to go to that individual landowner and say. this what we want. we want to buy your property. and this is what we are going to do with it. We should not take it under the cloud of eminent domain. The fifth amendment to the Constitution states that "private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation." This did not seem to matter when the Kelo decision was made. The Kelo ruling has essentially stripped the public of the constitutional right to own that property if someone thought they had a better use for it than they did. I think that is what bothers so many people on a bipartisan basis. rural. urban: The fact that a small business or home can be taken away from a private citizen simply to increase tax revenues is disturbing and shows a blatant disregard I think for the constitutional rights of our citizens. In Texas. our State legislature has already taken steps to correct the decision. at least under State law. by passing legislation that would prohibit the local government or private entity from taking private property through eminent domain for private benefit or economic development purposes. and we should do the same. at least as much as we can do under our Federal laws. So this bill does give us that opportunity to defend our fundamental constitutional rights of our constituents.
Date: 2005-11-03
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Chairman. I proudly join the gentleman from California in supporting this amendment. I appreciate the response that H.R. 4128 is attempting to convey. We just feel that there is a possibility that it m~ight have some unintended consequences. In 2002. President Bush signed the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act. and that bill authorized $200 million annually for Federal assistance to States and local communities to assess brownfield sites and to conduct cleanup where the assessment indicates the cleanup was warranted. The measure represented the centerpiece of the administrations environmental agenda. It was widely praised and received broad bipartisan support. and rightfully so. According to the Government Accountability Office" there are well over 500.000 brownfields in communities around the country. and brownfields represent the economic opportunity wherever they exist. These abandoned and underused industrial sites pose heavy economic. financial. and social burdens on the community. These burdens include blight. deterioration of neighboring properties and property values. neighborhood health hazards from contamination. and increased need for fire and police protection to limit the nuisance effect of brownfields. and increased sprawl as individuals and families and businesses relocate to the suburbs. farmland. and open space. Over the past decade. communities across the country have realized that responsible brownfield redevelopment can transform environmentally impaired property into productive property and positively impact distressed communities. The city of Dallas that I represent was one of the first" cities to be designated as a brownfield showcase community by the Environmental Protection Agency. Dallas has used assessment and remediation grant programs to redevelop 35 sites in the core of the city. Although the city has not used eminent domain to date in its brownfield redevelopment projects. they have shared with me that they certainly can anticipate perhaps a situation where the city might want to do this to acquire. I fully and strongly support the amendment.
Date: 2005-11-03
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I am champing at the bit here because he is absolutely right. and one of the things I want to emphasize. because I think in the last few nights we have not gotten this point across to the Speaker and to the folks who might be hearing this conversation this evening. the purpose of the 30something Group. the main purpose. is for us to help get some understanding out to our generationabout the issues that we are debating in this Congress and how it affects them. And the student aid cuts that the gentleman was talking about just a few minutes ago. more than any other issue almost. is the easiest for folks in our generation to understand how it impacts them. What maybe is not so obvious is what Congressman MEEK was just talking about a minute ago. The Republican leadership. our friends on the other side of the aisle. will try. as they put forth this reconciliation act. AKA budget cuts. because reconciliation and other words that are used inside this Chamber and in this Capitol. that is Washington speak for budget cuts. the budget cuts that they are saying they are going to need to put forward to address the deficit and to address the outofcontrol spending that they have engaged in are not for Katrina relief. are not being put forward so that we can pay for Katrina and for the aftermath of Katrina. They are so that they can preserve the $70 billion in tax cuts that they have put forward. Let us boil this down to its simplest terms. They will represent and have been representing that they have to do these cuts because the impact from Katrina is so significant and we have got to do something. We have got to get a handle on the spending. Why does getting a handle on the spending have .to be on the backs of the people who can least afford it and we are going to enrich the backs of the people who do not need help?
Date: 2005-11-03
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I wanted to be even more specific. because he is absolutely right. The groups that are out there trying to help those in need are opposing these cuts. Every major religious institution has sent letters to our Speaker. to this Republican leadership. asking them not to do what they are trying to do. not to harm people who are most in need. particularly in exchange for preserving tax cuts for our wealthiest citizens. Just ifi student aid alone. they are proposing a cut of more than $14.billion from the student aid program. which is the largest cut in history to Federal student loan programs. On top of that. it increases the cost for student borrowers who are already saddled with about $17.500 in debt. They will be forced to pay $5.800 more for their college loans. In my community that is really real money.
Date: 2005-11-03
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

That is real money. I do not know a lot of people who can just reach into their pocket or go down to their local bank branch and yank out $5.800.
Date: 2005-11-03
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. if the gentleman will yield further. if I can just say one thing. first of all. it is such a pleasure to see you and have you join us tonight. The gentlewoman from Nevada has been an amazing advocate for the pe6ple who are on this floor tonight championing their cause. Those of us in the 30something generation have had an opportunity to stand on your shoulders for the years you have been in Congress and been in the legislature in the State of Nevada fighting for the people that have no voice. That is really* why we are here. We are so glad and privileged to havq you join us tonight to take up this fight.
Date: 2005-11-03
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

If the gentleman will yield. $8 trillion is a really. really big number. a difficult number for a lot of people to get their minds around in terms of a concept. Tell us. how much money does that translate per man. woman and child in America?
Date: 2005-11-03
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I am also going to speak. up for those of our colleagues with white hair. because Mr. MEEK and I represent tens of thousands of folks with white hair. When the President talked about an ownership society. I think hewas talking. well. I must have misunderstood him because. apparently. he is more interested in making sure that the top 1 percent of the population owns everything and that they are the only ones in a position to own anything. Because if you look at peoples ability to afford housing. in almost every major city in America. it has become virtually out of reach. The average priceof a house in just my county is $348.000. the average price of a house. Now. that is not an attainable price for an average middleclass person. never mind somebody who is on the lower end of the socioeconomic spectrum. But let us talk about senior citizens. Let us -talk about the folks who are living on fixed incomes. And then. let us turn to the people who are in our community. in south Florida. who just got hit by a category 3 storm who. right after the storm. -were in a bad enough situation to begin with. because we got hit much worse than anyone expected. But then. 2 days ago. it started pouring rain on the houses that were already blown out by the wind and the rain.
Date: 2005-11-03
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Oh. yes. These people in this picture. this lovely couple who happen to be constituents of mine. they live in a condominium in my district where I just went door to door giving out selfheating meals. These are people who are frail. They were told that they had to leave because many hundreds of the apartments in this condominium complex alone are being condemned after the rain because there are gaping holes in the roof. And on top of that. with thousands of people now. thousands of people in Palm Beach. Broward. and. MiamiDade counties who were hit by Wilma and whose homes are being condemned. there are numbers in the thousands. and that is just after this weeks rain. we expect more rain in the future. and they are not even done counting the number of buildings that have been affected. This budget reconciliation. these budget cuts cut housing vouchers. cut affordable housing programs. Just in our State. we would take a 3.500 section 8 voucher cut. So we are talking about people who are hit by a natural disaster who are being forced out of their houses. and now -they will have the manmade disaster of this budget cut. these budget cuts that will force even more people out of their houses. . But "we want to create an ownership society in America." The President of the United States was elected to help people own things and to accumulate things All I can see anyone accumulating is people who already have a whole lot and could live their whole lives not accumulating one more thing. When is it going to stop? When are we going to be able to be in a position here in this Chamber to move this country in a new. direction and start helping people again?
Date: 2005-11-03
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. first I want to thank the Democratic leader of California for the opportunity to spend some.time talking about the issues of concern to Americans across this country. and as a member of the 30something Democrats. and I know I will be joined by my colleagues in a few moments. we have appreciated hearing from the literally hundreds of Americans both in our generation and across the generational spectrum over the last weeks since we have been talking about those issues on the floor here. My good friend from Pennsylvania. I cannot help but spend a few moments talking about some of the matters that. he has just addressed. being that I am a Representative of the State of Florida. and I had an opportunity to engage in a very interesting and informative and timely dialogue with the gentleman from Pennsylvania just yesterday. Unfortunately. the industry organization that he just cited. which he also cited in our debate the other night. Associated Industries of Florida. that is not an organization. if the Members are familiar with Florida politics. that is at all representative of the average business organization in our State. Associated Industries of Florida is primarily made up of the most major corporations in Florida. Every major oil company is a member of Associated Industries. So it makes quite a bit of sense that the opinion of Associated Industries would reflect what Mr. PETERSON of Pennsylvania just described.
Date: 2005-11-03
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. reclaiming my time. it is worse. It got worse from there. It was not just what he was doing with his attire. rolling up his shirt sleeves. but what he was wearing that they continued to talk about. On August 29. the day of the storm. Brown exchanged emails about his attire with Ms. Taylor. his press secretary again. She told him in the email. "You look fabulous." And Brown replied. "I got it at Nordstroms. Are you proud of me?" An hour later he added. If you look at my lovely FEMA attire. you will really vomit. I am a fashion God." This is the day of the storm. He is still being paid $148.000 a year to advise FEMA. according to Secretary Chertoff. and change. give or take a dollar or two. to advise FEMA about what they should be doing in the aftermath.
Date: 2005-11-03
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

The only thing that they are doing here is they have a lopsided partisan committee that is supposedly reviewing the aftermath of Katrina and FEMAs response. You know. I would feel much better about any review. although I strongly believe that there should be an independent Katrina commission. as do 81 percent of Americans. but if they had learned something between storms. We have had three storms in two months. from Katrina to Rita hnd from Rita to Wilma. They have learned nothing. After my district and that of the gentleman from Florida district got hit by Wilma. and Secretary Paulison now in FEMA is a qualified professional. so at least they have that right now. but unfortunately FEMA still is not getting it right. We still 10 days after the storm do not have a disaster recovery center established in Broward County or in Miami Dade County. a permanent one. There are seven mobile units between the two counties. We have more than 136.000 people in Broward alone who have applied for assistance. and .they cannot get it yet because FEMA only has 300 inspectors in the whole state and they can do about 10 a day in terms of the inspections. I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts..