macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 2005-07-21
Speaker: ZOE LOFGREN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. having just seen this amendment for the first time today. there are questions that are raised. I understand what the intent is. and perhaps if this passes we can clarify this in a conference committee. but I wonder about the liabilities of the banking industry that acts innocently ta help immigrants transmit funds home. The banks in California have been encouraged to regularize the remittance program. We talk sometimes about illegal immigration. and that is not anything that any of us approve of. but it is not the same as terrorism. and it is also not the same as those immigrants. It is also a financial services industry. I do wish we could have heard from the financial services industry on this point because certainly. it deserves some clarification. Maybe it does not do what has been suggested. We have had some communications from those who are concerned it does. But I do want to raise that on behalf of the California banking industry that has really stepped up to avoid the fraud and crime that has occurred with remittances before they did.
Date: 2005-07-21
Speaker: ZOE LOFGREN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman. although I plan to support this amendment to protect aircraft in U.S. airspace. I do want to rise and express my disappointment that the majority refused to accept an amendment that I offered in committee to further protect civilian aircraft. In committee. I offered an amendment that would punish those who sell dangerous 50 caliber sniper rifles to known terrorists. Unfortunately. some in the majority viewed this as a gun control measure. but it is not. This is a national security issue. Mr. Chairman. 50 caliber antiarmor sniper rifles are an ideal tool for terrorists because civil aircraft may be vulnerable to them. In fact. even early promotional materials for the 50 caliber rifle reference their threat to civilian aircraft. The promotional material states that the weapon could "target the compression section of jet engines making it capable of destroying multimillion aircraft with a single hit delivered to a vital area." The rifles brochure goes on to say: "The costeffectiveness of the 50 caliber cannot be overemphasized when a round of ammunition purchased for less than $10 can be used to destroy or disable a modern jet aircraft." Ll 1945 Since 9/11 our country has made great efforts to secure our civilian airplanes and airports. Terrorists will obviously adapt to our tactics. so it is vital that we plan and think ahead. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that if we make it difficult to get weapons on a plane or into an airport. terrorists may look to destroy airplanes from longer distances. That is what the 50 caliber rifle is designed to do. These rifles are accurate at ranges of at least 1.000 yards and even further in the hands of a trained marksman. In essence. these weapons could give a terrorist the ability to take a shot at an aircraft from beyond most airports security perimeter. There is already evidence that terrorists have sought these weapons. According to the Violence Policy Center. al Qaeda bought twentyfive 50 caliber antiarmor sniper rifles in the 1980s. My amendment in the Committee on the Judiciary simply said that if someone sells a 50 caliber sniper rifle to someone who they know is a member of al Qaeda they have broken the law. That amendment was defeated. and I think it is a shame. We should have passed my amendment and made it more difficult for terrorists to get ahold of these weapons. Unfortunately. we did not do so. I will certainly support the gentlemans amendment but with regret that we did not do more. Mr. Chairman. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 2005-07-21
Speaker: ZOE LOFGREN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Chairman. I yield myself such time as I may consume. I support the amendment. No American should be investigated solely for membership in a nonviolent political organization or for engaging in other lawful political activity. This is important to all of us. but I wanted to note that in California we recently learned of the danger of not living up to the standard. It has been reported by several media sources that the California National Guard was spying on the Mothers of Dead Soldiers and a group called the Raging Grannies. who are average age 75 years old. who were having a peaceful demonstration on the grounds of the State Capital on Mothers Day. I requested hearihgs in the Committee on Homeland Security. I have written to the California National Guard regarding this very serious allegation of a breach of first amendment protected activity. Federal funds may have been used. I will vote for this amendment. It is the right thing. but we also need to have very aggressive investigative action when we hear about allegations of misconduct. Mr. Chairman. I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Florida . a member of our committee.
Date: 2005-07-21
Speaker: WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Chairman. I thank the gentlewoman from California for yielding me this time. I rise in support of the Paul amendment and. in addition. in reluctant opposition to H.R. 3199 for several reasons. .Following the terrorist attacks of September 11. I watched as Members of Congress came together in a bipartisan effort to craft legislation which would. .it was argued. strengthen law enforcements hand in fighting terrorists. Americans from across the political spectrum were willing to sacrifice some of the freedoms we cherish to immediately address security concerns. with the understanding that many provisions would be revisited and the civil liberty protections that we all hold so dear would be addressed. But by making these provisions permanent. without mandatory congressional review. we placed the very democracy that we hold so dear in jeopardy. When restricting civil liberties. we should be extremely careful about forfeiting those freedoms without reviewing the ongoing need to continue to restrict them. In these contemporary times. it may be difficult for us to conceive of the barbarous proceedings of the Salem witch trials. Indeed. they continue to perplex and horrify those of us who came later. But imagine if those perceptions and resulting actions were somehow a permanent part of our society today without an opportunity for review as to their validity? If they were. under the PATRIOT Acts intrusive infringement on Americas book purchases and library records. when the most receht episode in the Harry Potter Book series was released last Friday. we would have had hundreds of thousands of children "burned at the stake." And I know this analogy might seem a bit extreme. but that is just how extreme things can become without proper checks and balances when restricting our civil liberties and freedoms. which is why we should support the Paul amendment. because true freedom of expression is an important thing to preserve. I am hopeful that when this legislation comes back from conference that we will have a product that we can all embrace. but today I will vote for freedom. I will support the Paul amendment and I will vote against final passage of this version of the bill.
Date: 2005-07-22
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Chairman. let me hasten to thank the chairman of the committee and the ranking member for continuing to work together. In our usual fashion. we have an agreed bill. I rise today to say that I fully support this bill and also to talk a little bit about the importance of NASA. For decades. NASA has attracted some of our best and brightest. The scientific and technological advances developed by the NASA program have truly been unmatched. From athletic shoes to breast cancer screening. NASA has touched almost every aspect of our lives. It is difficult to imagine what our lives would be like if not for the race to space. NASA plays a key part in developing. new technology and innovations. Underfunding or dismantling parts of NASA will negatively impact new research and technology. We must not fall behind other countries in this field. for this has been a major reason why we have been able to remain on the cutting edge with innovations. If the United States wants to continue to be on the technological forefront. NASA authorization must have a balanced approach that includes a strong dedication to science. aeronautics. and human exploration. As we move toward a new era in science and technology. the most important aspect of being globally competitive is developing young scientists. We must have a firm commitment to educating our young people. Therefore. this Congress needs a comprehensive authorization that addresses the needs of developing and retaining our best scientists. During a time of extreme divisive= ness in this Congress. I am very proud to say that this bill is a bipartisan compromise. I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting this important. piece of legislation.
Date: 2005-07-22
Speaker: GENE GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Chairman. I rise today in strong support of this bill to authorize funding for NASA programs over the next two fiscal years. Over the years. NASA as a government agency has stream lined and reduced their cost and has done amazing research and developed innovative technology. They are a model agency which should be applauded as a role model for. other government agencies to follow. I am pleased this bill will authorize $150 million for maintenance and repair of the Hubble Space Telescope by a manned mission. As this bill states. the Hubble telescope is an "extraordinary instrument" that has given us immense understanding and knowledge about the far reaching edges of the universe since its launch in 1990. I am also pleased this bill does not set a specific date for the retirement of the space shuttle. The shuttle has performed 113 flights since 1981. and is crucial to our vision of space exploration. While I agree we need to move beyond the shuttle at some point. we should not retire our only means for transporting humans into space without having a replacement vehicle ready to continue that mission. One of the most important benefits NASA provides does not occur on the launch pad. in the laboratories. or in space however. but in the classrooms 6f schools across this country. NASA is to science and math. what the National Football League and the National Basketball Association are to amateur sports. our space program inspires high school. middle school. and even elementary school students to take an interest in math and science. Since 1997. I have had the privilege of having NASA astronauts visit middle schools in the congressional district I represent. The interaction of these middle school students with the astronauts and the questions they ask about space and NASA. demonstrate the benefits of our space program and the impact it has in getting students excited about these subjects. Mr. Chairman. as a member of the Houston delegation.. home to the Johnson Space Center. I have been an avid supporter of NASA. As we return to flight. possibly as early as next Tuesday. this bill authorizes funding necessary to fulfill our vision for the future of the space program. I strongly support this bill and urge my colleagues to do the same.
Date: 2005-07-22
Speaker: AL GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Chairman. I would like to start by thanking the gentlewoman from Texas for her dynamic leadership on this issue. She has taken the bull by the horns. and she has done yeomans work. I am so honored that she has brought this to our attention. I would also like to thank the gentleman from New York and the gentleman from Tennessee because they have really demonstrated how bipartisanship can efficaciously cause us to reach a consensus that will cause great things to happen in the United States Congress. Those who say that there is no bipartisanship in this Congress are not familiar with the good works of this committee and especially the go od works of these fine men. the chair and the ranking member. Mr. Chairman. I want to make note that these institutions are not black and brown institutions. This is important because these institutions serve a multiplicity of ethnicities. They are the epitome of diversity. They are dearly needed because of the people that they serve. They do not get the children of the best and the brightest. They many times will get the children of the least. the last and the lost. They literally take the essence of mental clay and mold it into the quintessential manifestation of intellectual cloisonne. They are providing the bootstraps that we need in this society so that we can have good productive citizens who will pay .taxes and will become part of the main stream that we so desire. E 1115
Date: 2005-07-22
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Chairman. I rise to support the amendment. This committee has always accepted amendments and direction to be inclusive and I really appreciated that over the years. I appreciate the gentlewoman from Texas for putting this amendment up for consideration. We have in the managers amendment addressed much of the issue. and I am delighted that the Chair and ranking member have agreed to work to get perhaps more specific language ip the bill in conference. And so I thank them for their leadership. I thank both the Chair and the ranking member for always being open and being understanding about increasing opportunities.
Date: 2005-07-26
Speaker: GENE GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Madam Speaker. I rise in opposition to H.R. 3283 on both process and policy grounds. This legislation is on the floor this week simply to provide political cover for members who vote for the flawed Central American Free Trade Agreement. The consideration of this bill is not a real attempt to react to Chinese currency manipulation. trade barriers and statesponsored subsidies. It is merely an empty. rhetorical response to our valid concerns about Chinas ability to utilize CAFTA to circumvent U.S. trade laws. The bills titlethe U.S. Trade Rights Enforcement Actis. at best. a misnomer. because it actually prevents our country from enforcing its trade rights. While the bill purports to apply U.S. countervailing duty law to China. it contains three glaring loopholes that strip us from any ability to enforce that law. First. the bill limits our use of thirdparty data when investigating Chinese subsidies in antidumping cases. The effect of this provision is to force us to use Chinas own data in these cases. even though weve learned time and again that China does not play fair in the global trade market. The bill also exempts Chinese domestic subsidies when industries file both antidumping and countervailing duty cases. This provision essentially applies a more lenient standard to nonmarket economies than to market economies under U.S. antidumping and CVD law. Let me remind my colleagues that our goal here is to get tough on China. not give them a free pass while holding our friends with market economies to a tougher standard. The bill also imposes extra burdens on the U.S. that raises serious issues with regard to both sovereignty and separation of powers. The bill would direct the tommerce Department to essentially preclear the application of U.S. law to ensure consistency with the WTO. While every other U.S. law is deemed WTOcompliant unless and until the WTO rules otherwise. this bill makes our actions toward China jump through extra international hoops before it can ever be applied. Even worsefor the first time everthe bill would give the Commerce Department the power to align U.S. law with the WTO. without action from Congress. Article 1. Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution gives the Congressnot the executive branchthe sole responsibility for the regulation of foreign commerce. This provision is a serious infringement on the power of the legislative branch and strips the Congress of much. if not all. authority to deal with our countrys trade concerns with China. I urge my colleagues not to fall for the majoritys empty rhetoric. This bill will do nothing to help our trade problems with China and is a thinlyveiled diversionary tactic to shore up votes for the flawed CAFTA agreement. Look beyond the majoritys smoke and mirrors. and vote against this illtimed and illconceived legislation.
Date: 2005-07-26
Speaker: CORRINE BROWN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Florida

Mr. Speaker. I rise today to express my support for the Senatepassed amendment to include $1.5 billion to the veterans budget. After the budget shortfall was announced. both sides of the aisle in the Senate came together to take immediate action to address the issue. They passed a $1.5 billion emergency funding amendment to immediately get the funds to the people who need it. our veterans. ..The Republican leadership of the House decided to sit on their hands and wait for President Bush to pull out of the air a nurmber. .That. number was $975 million. This House passed that funding level and left for the July 4 recess. However. it turned out that the Bush level was $300 million short of funding veterans health. We know that budget is underfunded by more than $3 billion. that is B. billion. All Members need to do is read the independent budget. Every year they release their priorities. and every year the VA is short of funding to complete its mission. While we were sitting on our hands. the three surgical operating rooms at the White River Junction in VAMC was closed on June 27 because the heating and air conditioning system was broken. The communitybased outpatient clinics needed to meet veterans increased demand for care in the North Florida and South Georgia VA health care system was delayed due to fiscal restraint. As of April in Gainesville. Florida. there were nearly 700 serviceconnected veterans waiting for more than 30 days for an appointment. Let us get past the $1.5 billion for veterans health care. let us just stop all of the talking and put our talk into action. Pass this motion to instruct and get veterans the health care that they need and deserve today.
Date: 2005-07-26
Speaker: GENE GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Speaker. I rise in opposition to H.R. 525. the Small Business Health Fairness Act. The sponsors of this legislation have a laudable intent: To make health insurance more affordable for small businesses by allowing them to band together to increase their purchasing power and negotiate lower health insurance rates. With costs in the private health insurance growing 12.8 percent each year. no one would disagree that our small businesses are struggling to provide coverage for their employees. But this legislation is not the answer to the rising cost of health insurance in this country. Mr. Speaker. the regulation of health insurance has long rested with the States. For decades. State legislatures in each of our States have enacted State coverage mandates and consumer protections to ensure that residents of thos6 States purchase a quality health insurance policy. While some policies cost more than others. thanks to State regulations. consumers can be assured that all policies offer a minimum level of coverage. * In my home State of Texas. health plans must provide access to emergency services. immunizations for children. direct access to OB/GYNs. and coverage of diabetes supplies and educationjust to name a few guaranteed benefits. The State has also enacted important consumer protection laws that afford consumers external review and limit how much insurers can charge sicker groups of people. Under H.R. 525. however. the State would have no authority to ensure that Federal association health plans provide these benefits and consumer protections. By taking away these vital patient protections. the policies purchased under AHPs would be worth little more than the paper they are printed on. The amendment offered by our colleagues
Date: 2005-07-26
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent that the motion to recommit be considered as read and printed in the RECORD.
Date: 2005-07-26
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. I submit a motion to recommit along with my colleagues on the Committee on Education and the Workforce. the gentlewoman from New York . the gentlewoman from California . and the gentlewoman from Minnesbta
Date: 2005-07-26
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. I would hope that people would support this motion to recommit. This is fundamental and basic. It is about whether or not people will have coverage that works for them when they or a member of their family becomes sick. CBO has looked at this legislation three times. and three times they have determined that almost 8 million people who today have health care coverage that is good coverage. they will be stripped of that coverage and put into these AHPs. In fact. they expect that 90 percent of the new enrollees will be people who come out of better plans who will lose that coverage that people have fought hard for in almost every State in this Union. to have those kinds of health care protections that our three colleagues just spoke about in support of this motion to recommit. I would urge the House to support the motion to recommit and reject this legislation that is harmful to the health care coverage of millions of Americans and their families.
Date: 2005-07-26
Speaker: GENE GREEN (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Chairman. I rise today in support of H.R. 22. the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act. This bill will allow for the Postal Service to better serve the American People by significantly modernizing its outdated policies. The last postal reform bill was signed by President Nixon in 1971 and at that time no one could have anticipated all of the technological advances our society would create. At that time we all sent letters to keep in contact with each other and email was something that we never could have imagined. Unfortunately. while we have advanced with the times. the Postal Service has been slow to keep up with our advancing technology. H.R. 22 will allow the Postal Service to continue providing comprehensive universal service. but at a much lower cost. This bill is the product of hard work between the labor unions. the Postal Service. and the Government Reform Committee. It is a good piece of legislation that will give the Postal Service the rate modernization it needs and it will create a level playing field for the Postal Service to compete with other companies. I strongly support this bill not only because my late father inlaw was a letter carrier. but because the Postal Service has provided a vital service to the public for many years. Its time that we allow them to modernize so that we may continue to enjoy all of the benefitsthat they have afforded us.
Date: 2005-07-26
Speaker: EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Texas

Mr. Chairman. I rise today to speak in support of The Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act of 2005 As we move into a new phase of technological advancements. now is the time for significant reform of our postal system. With over 600thousand postal workers. the U.S Posfal Service is an essential part of todays national economic infrastructure. In my home town of Dallas. TX. the roles of postal workers are vividly seen in homes. businesses. and even churches. We must have a firm commitment to ensuring that these vital- public servants have guaranteed healthcare and retirement benefits. collective bargaining rights. and a decent pay. H.R. 22 will bring increased efficiencies to the United States Postal Service. and strengthen the longterm viability of universal postal services. We must act now to ensure that 6day a week delivery is maintained for all Americans. I hope my colleagues will join me in supporting this key piece of legislation.