macleginn/stanford_congress_record_longer_speeches huggingface dataset:
Date: 1982-03-11
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. for months we have known that this moment was coming. We have watched with compassion. with hope. disappointment. and finally sorrow. as Senator WILLIAMS wrestled to free himself from his dilemma. As we watched the Abscam trials. as we reviewed the evidence. as we listened to the arguments offered here over several days. we knew that we were not a dispassionate audience. By oath of duty and constitutional responsibility. we are charged with protecting and preserving the Senates reputation and its character from defamation and disrepute. None of us was elected to this body because he or she is an angel or a saint. It is Incumbent upon each of us. upon whom has been Imposed the highest public trust. to strive to the utmost to be faithful to that public trust. We must set the example of a higher standard than that which is required of the average citizen. To do more would require us to be angels. To do less would be unfaithful to the trust. It would erode the confidence of the American people and our Constitution. The Roman Empire fell largely because the citizens of Rome lost faith in the Roman Senate. The citizens of Rome lost faith in the Roman Senate largely because they lost faith in the men who bore the title of Senator. After years of cynicism. after Watergate. after rumors and whispers of wrongdoing in high places. the American people have been watching Intently to see how we would deal with the charges of misconduct in our own midst. Frankly. some of our fellow citizens scoffed that we demand of others a pound of flesh but punish ou.rselves only with the stroke of a feather duster. During these past several days the Senate has been on trial in a tragedy that has no heroes. Certainly. the Justice Department can claim no heroics in plotting the events that would not have occurred without the Justice Departments and the FBIs creation. Nevertheless. as reprehensible as the FBIs conduct and the Jestice Departments conduct appears to have been. the fact remains that the Senate. fulfilling its responsibilities under the Constitution. was rapidly coming to what. in my judgment. was to bethe most severe punishment set forth under the Constitution. By any objective standard. HARRISON WILLIAMS has made contributions to my work as the leader of the majority and as the leader of the minority. He has made contributions to the work of his other colleagues. to the Senate. to New Jersey. and to the United States that are worthy of the appreciation of all. Yet. the Senate was fast coming to that inevitable decision. The decision that Senator WILLIAMS has reached is the right decision. Sorrowful though It is. he has chosen to take a course that we all respect. This is a sad moment for the Senate. for his friends. for his wife Jeanette. for his colleagues. and. most of all. for
Date: 1982-03-15
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. the administrations budg et for fiscal year 1983 contains a proposal to abolish the Railroad Rethument Board. shift tier I benefit paymenAts to the Social Senurlty Administration. convert tier II benefit payments to a private negotiated system. and reduce the dual benefit payment. I have heard from many West Virginia railroad workers and retirees who are greatly concerned over the administrations plan and oppose it vigorously. I agree that this proposal is unfair and unwarranted. Last year. the Congress acted to tighten the financial soundness of the Railroad Retirement System. and I feel that It is unconscionable that the administration is now proposing that this system be disrupted. Because of the concerns of my constituents and my belief that there is nothing to be gained by eliminating a Federal agency that. provides a basic service to the railroad workers and retirees and whose administrative costs are fully funded by the taxes paid by the railroad management and employees. I am pleased to join as a cosponsor of the resolution introduced by my dis-. tinguished colleague from Ohio. opposing the administrations proposals with respect to the Railroad Retirement System. I ask unanimous consent that my name be added as a cosponsor of Mr. METZENBAUMS resolution. Senate Resolution 334.
Date: 1982-03-15
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. I will speak today on the subject of the U.S. Senate. I will speak until about 1 oclock. at which time the agent identities bill will be resumed. At that time I will delay the further reading of my statement until in the afternoon when the discussion on tbo agent identities bill has been completed. At that time I will complete the reading of my statement. I ask unanimous consent that the two readings be joined in the RECORD to show no interruption.
Date: 1982-03-16
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I move to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution reaffirming that deposits. up to the statutorily prescribed amount. in federally Insured depository institutions are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States.
Date: 1982-03-16
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. recently numerous reports and newsstories have discussed serious problems in the thrift industry. raising fears among some depositors that their funds might be jeopardized if there were largescale failures of depository institutions. The resolution before the House today confirms that depositors whose accounts are federally insured up to the statutory $100.000 limit of Federal insurance are completely protected by the full faith and credit of the United States. The resolution points out that since the 1930s the American people have relied upon Federal deposit insurance to insure the safety and security of their funds in federally insured depository Institutions and that the security of those funds is an essential element of our American financial system. In recent times. as I have said. the condition of certain depository institutions has caused some depositors to be concerned about the safety of their funds in such depository institutions and to seek reassurance regarding the Federal commitment to safeguard the availability of these funds. Therefore. the resolution reaffirms that deposits up to the statutorily prescribed amount in federally insured depository institutions are. indeed. backed by the full faith and credit of the UDL.ed States of America. The contents of this resolution have bleen discussed with the other body and there appears to be a consensus on the contents. Mr. Speaker. I reserve the balance of my time.
Date: 1982-03-16
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on the concurrent resolution just considered.
Date: 1982-03-16
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. this afternoon the members of the Democratic conference unanimously agreed to send a letter to the President containing specific suggestions for breaking the budget deadlock In which we find ourselves anti which has lasted for about 6 weeks. After an initial review and several meetings of an 18member group of Senators which I asked to scrutinize the budget and to recommend ways to alter the current course away from huge deficitshuge deficits that are Inherent in the Presidents budgetthe conference voted unanimously. as I say. to adopt the groups recommendations and I was instructed to send them to the President. We Democrats believe that these recommendations represent a valuable first step toward the development of a realistic alternative which will provide for a course on the road leading to reduced deficits and bringing interest rat .s down. Our letter is not Intended as a comprehensive alternative in any sense. but it does contain recommendations which will save roughly $100 billion. which Is no small start. There are two basic reasons we Democrats have moved at this time. The first is that the economy cannot afford the luxury of a continued administrationcongressional deadlock on the budget. Second. the administration budget proposal now on the table. taken along with those things that the President has placed off limits. is not. itself. a realistic and credible document. There is virtual consensus among members of both parties that what the President has placed off limits cannot remain off limits because the prospect of cuttink: out 60 percent of the Government. which is what we would have to do to balance the Presidents budget in 1985. under the Presidents conditionsfrom which he Is refusing thus far to budgeis not within the realm of the real. I used a rather revealing chart of CBO figures to illustrate this point at the press conference following the conferences actions. The message should be clear. Senate Democrats have made some specific recommendations. We are willing to consider any and all recommendations that the President may come forward to offer. Mr. President. I ask unanimous consent that my prepared remarks at the press conference be printed in the RECORD at this point. and I also ask unanimous consent that a copy of the letter which I was instructed by the Democratic conference to write to the President also be printed in the RECORD in its entirety.
Date: 1982-03-17
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. I thank the majority leader. I will accept the time and I yield the time. that the distinguished majority leader has just yielded to me. if he has no need to have it back at some point. to Mr. BAUCUS.
Date: 1982-03-17
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. I also yield the time under my order. 10 minutes of it to Mr. BAUCUS and 5 minutes of it to Mr. PROXMIRE.
Date: 1982-03-17
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. for too long our httelligence agencies have been thL subject of attack and scorn and abuse. For too long. these agencies have been pilloried and accused of being responsible for virtually everything that goes wrong anywhere in the world. And these agencies. operating in the necessarily gray world of utter secrecy. are virtually helpless to defend themselves. But there is a point at which a responsible line must be drawn. a point where we In the Congress have a responsibility to stand up and be counted and say. "No. beyond this line you are not permitted to go." That line. in my judgment. involves the intentional publication of the actual names and identities of secret U.S. intelligence agents who have willingly put their lives on the line in defense of our country. That line involves those situations where agents names are being published for the express purpose of harming these Individuals and their missions. No criticism of our policies requires the sacrificing of our intelligence agents. Therefore. Mr. President. this strong new criminal law. which would penalize the naming of these agents. is entirely justified. There is little doubt that there is a handful of reckless individuals who at times seem to be intent on wanting to see harm befall our officers. Some of them have publicly expressed their desire to damage the intelligence operations of this country. It is their conduct which is the focus of this legislation. Mr. President. I will be voting in favor of S. 391 in its present form because we must make sure that in our zeal to penalize the kinds of Individuals I have just described. we do not exaggerate our effort to the point of losing this bill in the courts. We must make clear that we are accomplishing what we say we are trying to accomplish. we must not leave our purpose open to challenge. I am fearful that in. todays judicial climate. a challenge might be successfully maintained against a bill which sought to punish purely negligent reporting. as distinguished from the intentional revelation of names for the purpose of harming our country. So I support S. 391 in Its present form. The bill makes clear that we are seeking to punish those unscrupulous individuals who are avowedly seeking to harm our intelligence operations. I commend the Senator from Delaware and the Senator from New York and their colleagues on the Judiciary and Intelligence Committees for their wisdom in seeking to add this tough and essentjal provision to our Nations criminal laws.
Date: 1982-03-17
Speaker: WILLIAM J. COYNE (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. the administrations bellicose response to the situation in El Salvador makes it clear that it is not sensitive to the problems of the Third World. By its reductions in urban development. infrastructure repair. and job training programs. the administration shows its lack of understanding of the problems in what I call the "Fourth World"-those older. industrial regions of the country which are now bearing the brunt of a calculated recession. Mr. Speaker. my city of Pittsburgh has an unemployment rate of 10.2 percent. That shocking figure is dwarfed by the unemployment rate of a nearby municipality. Butler. Pa. has an unem. ployment rate of 17.7 percent. Last week the city received the news that the 80yearold PullmanStandard railcar plant will close for good. leaving 3.000 employees Jobless. The administrations response to this increasingly critical situation has been one of startling unconcern. It seems more intent on insuring that its tax breaks. which mainly favor the welltodo. remain untouched. I urge the administration to devote *more of its attention to the problems of the most distressed regions of our country. I would like to share with my colleagues an article from the March 16 Wall Street Journal which describes the effect of the recession on the city of Pittsburgh.
Date: 1982-03-18
Speaker: WILLIAM J. COYNE (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. in its rush to make the already comfortable more comfortable. the administration has lost sight of the needs of what has been termed the "other America"-the poor people. There is evidence that the sheer number of poor people is growing. reversing a downward trend in recent years. In the Halls of Congress. we hear many statistics about such. things as the relative tax savings level of Individuals. or the profitablity of lowering the tax on capital gains. All too rarely. however. do we hear that the number of poor people in our country is growing. According to a Census Bureau study. from 1979 to 1980. more than 3 million persons entered the federally defined ranks of the poor. Those classified as poor rose from 11.6 percent of the population in 1979 to 13 percent in 1980a rather dramatic rise for such a short time period. The effect of the budget and tax cuts enacted last yearcuts which disproportionately punish the poor while lightening the burdens of the welltodoseems likely to cause that number to grow. As we begin the debate on proposed new cutbacks n such programs as aid to families with dependent children. I think we should give special attention to the rise in our Nations poverty. We cannot allow the impoverishment of one sector of our society while rewarding another. I was pleased to be able to attend National Urban League hearings in Pittsburgh March 8 on the proposed cuts in the aid to families with dependent children program. I would like to share with my colleagues the views of two Pittsburgh residents on the effect of the proposed cuts. Gordon Lewis. an associate professor of sociology at the CarnegieMellon University School of Urban and Public Affairs. analyzes how the administration approach to AFDC may actually discourage recipients from finding useful employment. Frankie Mae Jeter. executive director of the Welfare Rights OrganizationsAllegheny County. describes how flawed perceptions of who benefits from the program contribute to unfortunate political mythn. I am including in the RECORD at this point the observations of Professor Lewis and the testimony of Frankie Mae Jeter:
Date: 1982-03-18
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

President Reagan was correct Tuesday in rejecting. as propaganda. Premier Leonid Brezhnevs recent arms control proposals. The Soviets are proposing a freeze on the deployment of their SS20 mediumrange missiles aimed at Western Europe and a possible dismantling of some of their older missiles. In exchange. they are asking the United States and our NATO allies to cancel plans for the deployment of new Pershing II and groundlaunched cruise missiles in Western Europe which is scheduled to begin next year. But reality dictates that the President stand pat on his zerooption proposal. And the President stood firm on the side of reality and prudence. Under the zerooption proposal. NATO would abandon plans to deploy the 572 new U.S. missiles in Europe if the Soviets dismantle their SS20. SS4. and SS5 missiles. What Brezhnev proposed. at a minimum. was freezing in place the estimated 300 SS20 mediumrange missiles. each capable of carrying three nuclear warheads. I agree with the statement issued by the White House Tuesday. That the unilateral moratorium offered by Brezhnev is neither unilateral nor a moratorium. I Both our British and West German allies agreed with the Presidents characterization of the Soviet proposal. British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher correctly observed that it would freeze "the total superiority of the Soviet Union in these fearsome nuclear weapons." West German Government spokesman Kurt Becker called upon Brezhnev to accept President Reagans zero solution. If we are to come to grips with the problem of the escalation in strategic and mediumrange nuclear missiles. then sincere efforts have to be made in the mutual reductions of these arsenals. The United States and our allies should not be lulled into believing that the Soviet Union has now become serious in negotiating mutual reductions in nuclear armaments. Therefore. I believe the President should press for the opening of strategic arms reduction talks just as soon as possible. He should capitalize on the obvious propaganda ploy implicit in Brezhnevs offer. By doing this. both the American people and our Western European allies quickly would gain a sense of whether or not the Soviets .re serious. or merely content to engage in hollow and meaningless rhetoric on the nuclear arms control issue. The President is to be supported for rejecting Brezhnevs proposals for the deployment of mediumrange missiles in Western Europe. I applaud his resolve and his willingness to assess. correctly and in explicit terms. the Soviet Unions newest proposalsproposals which are not legitimate efforts at se. rious arms control. Mr. President. I yield the floor.
Date: 1982-03-22
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. I wish to thank the majority leader for his characteristic courtesy and for his efforts to work out this matter. It is with our approval and satisfaction on the minority side. and we appreciate the opportunity of having participated in working out this arrangement.
Date: 1982-03-22
Speaker: ROBERT C. BYRD (democrat)
Chamber: S

Mr. President. I share the views that have just been expassed by the distinguished acting Republican leader. Will he put in a quorum call and not charge it against anyone on the bill until some of the participants can arrive?
Date: 1982-03-23
Speaker: WON PAT (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. in an editorial authored by its perceptive editor. Joseph C. Murphy. the Pacific Daily News recently pointed out thatWhile the Reagan administration worries about the Caribbean. the truth is that the Pacific islands. with the same resources and the same problems. are suffering just as much. I was pleased to read the papers suggestion that the United States should develop a Pacific policy. It is a step that I urged the President to take when his administration began work on the Caribbean basin initiative. And. although that proposal would extend to the Pacific territories some of the tax and customs provisions designed to assist our Caribbean territories. this administration still has articulated no comprehensive Pacific basin initiative. In its absence. the administration has proposed budgetary and tax policies which would impede progress toward economic development and undermine the fiscal health of our Pacific insular areas. So. again today. I call upon the President to take a serious look at the Pacific basinboth the American islands and our neighborsand construct policies which will advance our domestic and foreign policy goals in the region.
Date: 1982-03-23
Speaker: DE LA GARZA (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. we mourn the loss of a brilliant man. a professional in the area of diplomacy. a friend of the United States. Frank Gill of New Zealand. Ambassador Gill became that nations ambassador to the United States and Mexico in 1980. He served his country with impressive distinction. Interested in furthering trade he focused on the importance of agricultural commodities as a trade feature. He and I had many delightful visits when with eloquent persuasion he expounded the virtues of his country and sought an avenue of trade with ours. Ambassador Gill was stricken with cancer suddenly and mercifully passed away on March 1. 1982. after going home to Ackland a few days before. A native of New ealand. he joined his countrys Air Force in 1937 and served in the Air Force in various capacities. the most notable being 1957 to 1959. when he awas the armed forces attach6 to the United States. He knew the problems of a Member of Congress. - having served as a Member of Parliament. Service to his nation included the minister of health. of immigration. of defense. of police. in charge of war pensions. and in charge of rehabilitation in his country. He was a giant of a man whose presence will be missed. To his lovely wife Barbara and three daughters. I ask my colleagues to extend the condolences of this House.
Date: 1982-03-23
Speaker: ST GERMAIN (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I am pleased to add my support to that of the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on Housing and Community Development. my colleague from Texas in urging the House to move expeditiously to approve H.R. 5708. This bill would extend the section 235 homeownership assistance program which is due to expire March 31 of this year to September 30 of this year. Until 2 years ago. the section 235 homeownership program. which provides interest subsidies to people up to 95 percent of area median income to assist them in achieving homeownership. was a little used program. Enacted as part of the landmark Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968. the use of the is program has been quite extensive in the last 2 years be. cause of the poor conditions in the homebuilding industry. In many parts of the country. the section 235 program is the only program that is enabling homebuilders to keep their heads above the waters of financial bankruptcy. Because of provisions enacted as part of the GrammLatta substitute to the Reconciliation Act of last year. the Congress was forced to accept an early termination of this program. Now. Mr. Speaker. we are seeing the demonstrated need for Federal programs such as this one that sustains the homebuilding industry. H.R. 5008 has widespread support from the housing industry and from Members on both sides of the aisle. I am pleased that we have the cooperation of the distinguished ranking minority member. my colleague from Ohio. BILL STANTONs. support for the prompt enactment of this bill.e
Date: 1982-03-23
Speaker: SAM B. HALL (democrat)
Chamber: H

Mr. Speaker. I ask unanimous consent that the March 8. 1982. and House Report 97445 filed on that date be corrected to indicate that the report was filed by