mesut/congress_speeches huggingface dataset:
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019
James M. Inhofe (Republican, OK) \u2014 2018-6-18

first of all, let me just agree with the comments that were made by Senator Reed. He has been great to work with. I am glad he mentioned all the help of his staff. People don't realize how, on a bill this size--this is the largest bill we will consider probably this year--how much staff is involved. It is both and ic staff. It is one of the few things we do around here that really isn't partisan. I think the Senator from Rhode Island and I were only apart from each other on maybe 10 or 11 amendments. By the way, on amendments, I do want to comment how many amendments we took care of during the committee hearing. So we have had a lot of activity on the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for 2019. prgtoken Throughout the last 2 weeks, we have debated this legislation on the Senate floor in an open process. We have said over and over, we want to have open amendments, and we want to have people bring amendments down. We have a system that is probably not going to be changed, but there is going to be some activity this next year by several of us, if we are going to be involved in next year's authorization bill for the year 2020, to see if we can't address a major problem; that is, we have allowed a system to take place where 1 person can stop 99 people from having an amendment. That is wrong. prgtoken In January, President and Secretary Mattis announced the new national defense strategy that rightfully identified that we are returning to a world of great power and competition when dominated by the capabilities relative to China and Russia. We talked about that, the power they have. We have talked about an article that was written just recently that said that if we got into a fight of Russia versus NATO, most likely NATO would lose to Russia. We have watched China in the South China Sea putting together islands where it is almost as if they are preparing for World War III. I was there in the South China Sea, and our people made it very clear--and I am talking about allies of ours--that they are not sure which would win. We have China out there illegally building islands and putting us in a position where we don't really know what their intentions are. All we know is, everything on those islands--we are talking about over 3,000 now--that they are put in a position where they are preparing for a world war. prgtoken It is not like it used to be. Now we are in a situation where a country can have a rocket that can hit an American city. So times have changed. We need to be prepared to respond to threats of terrorism from rogue states, like Iran and North Korea. The National Defense Strategy is clear. We need to make strategic investments now in the areas where we are falling behind--and we are behind. prgtoken Since the release of the National Defense Strategy, I have traveled to visit our allies in both Eastern Europe and Asia. They all understand the threat of
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019
Charles E. Schumer (Democrat, NY) \u2014 2018-6-18

second, I wish to mention this. The House is toying with a bill, supported by some of the less extreme s, and they are trying to deal with this issue of family separation. prgtoken First, we haven't seen the copy, but from all reports, it doesn't really deal with this. Second, it is loaded up with so many other poison pills that it is never going to see the light of day. prgtoken If our colleagues in the House, who endeavored to pass the discharge petition and failed by a few votes--so they could help the Dreamers--want to do something real about this, about the Dreamers, and about family reunification, the support of the bill that is dead on arrival in the Senate will not assuage their constituents, assuage their conscience, or, most important, fix the problem. prgtoken .
TRIBUTE TO ERIKA K. LUNDER
Ron Wyden (Democrat, OR) \u2014 2018-6-18

I wish to offer my most sincere appreciation and gratitude to Erika K. Lunder, legislative attorney with the American Law Division of the Congressional Research Service, CRS. Erika will be leaving CRS on June 22, 2018, after 15 years of dedicated and selfless service to CRS and Congress. She was a trusted adviser on tax law to Members on both sides of the aisle, and her guidance and counsel will be deeply missed by me and many of my colleagues. prgtoken Throughout her time at CRS, Erika provided substantial legislative support to Members of Congress and congressional staff who often turned to her for analysis, brainstorming, and consultation on various aspects of tax law. Erika covered all aspects of tax law, from individual to corporate to international, and in connection with every subject on which Congress legislates, from health and energy policy, to campaign finance, immigration, and veterans. Her work in these areas included assisting Congress with interpretations of current and proposed law, explaining case law and legal developments, and analyzing legislative proposals at various stages of the process. Erika's work was used by Congress in hearings, legislative development, markups, and preconference negotiations. prgtoken Erika was a tireless worker who never said no to a request and was always willing to make herself available, on a moment's notice, 7 days a week, to help inform the policy process. She was able to describe and distill the most complex and opaque tax law concepts in layman's terms in both her writing and her oral consultations to her clients. prgtoken During her time at CRS, Erika contributed her tax law expertise in support of major pieces of tax legislation that were enacted into law, as well as issues that are still the subject of congressional debate, such as the taxation of internet sales. prgtoken Erika's extensive knowledge of tax law and her keen ability to frame and analyze issues of paramount concern to Congress often made her the primary point of contact for congressional staff. In addition, Erika was an invaluable resource to her colleagues at CRS, working at some time or another with almost everyone in the Service, providing her tax law expertise in combination with their legal and policy expertise in other areas. I thank her for her service to Congress and the Nation and wish her all the best.
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019
Richard J. Durbin (Democrat, IL) \u2014 2018-6-18

I rise to highlight a number of important issues related to this year's defense authorization act. prgtoken Let me begin with a few words about the chairman of the Armed Services Committee. It is fitting that the bill is named after the senior Senator from Arizona, as the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act. His imprint is clear and direct, all throughout this bill. The bill makes clear America's strong commitment to our allies-- from Europe to Asia. It also demonstrates our clear commitment to defend those allies from our enemies whenever and wherever the need arises. prgtoken Those are principles held by every Member of this Senate. But there are few who can defend those principles more vigorous to friend or foe than the senior Senator from Arizona. As he noted in a speech last fall, ``The international order we helped build from the ashes of world war, and that we defend prgtoken to this day, has liberated more people from tyranny and poverty than ever before in history. This wondrous land has shared its treasures and ideals and shed the blood of its finest patriots to help make another, better world. And as we did so, we made our own civilization more just, freer, more accomplished and prosperous. . . .'' prgtoken Even though he cannot be here, he is here with us, and we are there with him. I would also like to thank the ranking member and the senior Senator from Oklahoma for their work to protect our national defense and provide for our servicemembers. prgtoken One area that I wish to highlight--and the defense authorization highlights this year--is the U.S. investment in maintaining our technological edge. We recently held a classified hearing in the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee on this subject. The short of it is that America cannot take its advantages for granted. prgtoken It is not clear to me that the Federal Government has its head in the game. In the 1960s, Federal investment in R&D reached as high as 2.23 percent of GDP. In 2016, that had plummeted to 0.77 percent. In 1995, the U.S. ranked fourth globally for R&D expenditures as a share of GDP. By 2015, it ranked tenth. Recent history is no better. Last year, the President proposed a 17-percent cut to Federal R&D, a greater annual cut than any in the postwar era, including a 5 percent cut to defense R&D. prgtoken I appreciate how strongly this year's defense authorization highlights the importance of this issue, including increased emphasis on high priority emerging technologies like hypersonics, artificial intelligence, space, and cyber. Chairman Shelby and I will do our part as appropriators to maintain a strong emphasis on innovation and technology, and I appreciate hearing a similarly clear message from the Armed Services Committee. prgtoken One area I am concerned about is the state of our defense personnel. Last year, Congress approved a 2.4-percent increase in pay for our military personnel and our Defense
ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS
Catherine Cortez Masto (Democrat, NV) \u2014 2018-6-18

after 19 years of dedicated service to the court, U.S. Magistrate Judge Valerie P. Cooke will be retiring on July 31, 2018. I wish to recognize Judge Cooke for her excellent service to the Federal judiciary and the State of Nevada while serving as U.S. Magistrate Judge for the District of Nevada since 1999. prgtoken As a third generation Nevada attorney, Judge Cooke has worked diligently to advance communities across Nevada, notably working to ensure equal protection under the law for the most vulnerable and forgotten populations. Judge Cooke initiated the CLEAR--Court Led Efforts at Recovery--court program, Nevada's first Federal reentry court, which helps to alleviate the barriers that formerly incarcerated individuals face as they attempt to reintegrate into society. She also worked to ensure inmates received timely resolutions to their civil rights claims by developing the District of Nevada's inmate early mediation program and implementing electronic filing for civil rights litigation. prgtoken Judge Cooke has also held leadership positions in a number of prestigious organizations and committees. Judge Cooke served as the 2008-2009 president of the Bruce R. Thompson Chapter of the American Inns of Court and continues to be active as an emeritus master. Judge Cooke was also the president of the Northern Nevada Women Lawyers Association in 1990 and was the 2001 recipient of the Outstanding Woman Lawyer of the Year Award. prgtoken Prior to her tenure on the bench, Judge Cooke served on the Nevada Tax Commission and the Nevada Judicial Discipline Commission. She has also devoted significant time to the advancement of alternative dispute resolution, serving on the Ninth Circuit's alternative dispute resolution committee from 2001 until 2013 and chairing the committee from 2009 to 2013. She has also conducted educational programs on the subject across the country and abroad. prgtoken In addition to her work in public service, Judge Cooke has consistently given back to her community. She has served as a mentor and as a role model for youth in Nevada through her involvement with Big Brothers Big Sisters, which led to her being named the 2009 School- Based Big Sister of the Year by Big Brothers Big Sisters of Northern Nevada. Judge Cooke conducts annual presentations to elementary through high school students on the work of a Federal judge and volunteers her time each year to serve as a high school mock trial judge. Judge Cooke embodies the Nevada values of leadership, service, and hard work. I ask my colleagues to join me in commending Valerie P. Cooke for her many years of service to the District of Nevada, the Federal bench, and communities across Nevada and the Nation.
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019
Patrick J. Leahy (Democrat, VT) \u2014 2018-6-18

today the Senate will approve its version of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act. It is right and fitting to name this bill after the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, who has for years been a stalwart advocate for our military and our national defense. prgtoken Unlike the defense authorization bills of recent years, this bill is streamlined and straightforward. It is focused on improving strategic Department of Defense thinking and aligning resources to meet that strategy. It also conforms to the bipartisan budget agreement reached earlier this year. prgtoken I am pleased that this bill renews a commitment to securing America's leading edge of technological innovation. This is great news for States large and small, including Vermont. The bill includes provisions to improve the long-term strategic development and purchasing of microelectronics for the defense industry. It includes a partial solution to the delays of Federal recognition for members of the Guard receiving their State commissions. It fixes the TRICARE dental plan management and options that have frustrated Vermonters. It includes numerous provisions to support small businesses in the industrial base, including to improve cyber security. Building on last year's language, the bill adds to the accounting of usage of the long-chain molecules that have been found to have dangerous health effects, particularly its use in Air Force firefighting foam. These are all appropriate issues to be dealt with through the defense authorization bill. prgtoken Like any product of compromise, however, this bill is not perfect. I am frustrated that, despite a bipartisan majority of Senators voting in support of further debating the bill's treatment of low-yield nuclear weapons, we are advancing to a vote on final passage without that debate. Low-yield nuclear weapons are dangerous and add nothing to our nuclear deterrence. Any administration should at least have to specifically ask to build them. prgtoken Similarly, a bipartisan majority of Senators rejected the tabling of an amendment to prohibit the indefinite detention of American citizens; yet the bill includes no such provision. The underlying bill also continues the mistake of the Guantanamo Bay detention mission. prgtoken On balance, the final bill on which the Senate votes today is truly bipartisan. I will support this National Defense Authorization Act. (At the request of Mr. Cornyn, the following statement was ordered to be printed in the Record.)
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019
Jack Reed (Democrat, RI) \u2014 2018-6-18

as we approach the vote on final passage of the fiscal year 2019 national defense authorization bill, I would like to make a few closing remarks. prgtoken At the completion of floor debate on the NDAA last year, I remarked in my closing statement that I was disappointed in the lack of cooperation in the Senate. Senator McCain and I both hoped that last year we would be able to return to regular order, but in the end, we were disappointed. prgtoken Unfortunately, this year, I and I know many of my colleagues are frustrated in the inability to bring up, debate, and vote on worthy amendments. For comparison, during consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994, there were 16 rollcall votes on amendments. In 1995, during consideration of the fiscal year 1996 NDAA, there were 20 rollcall votes and amendments. In the following year, the fiscal year 1997 NDAA, there were 19 rollcall votes and amendments. On this bill, there was a single up-or-down vote on an amendment. prgtoken I was one of the few Senators who was able to debate an amendment. It was on the congressional oversight of nuclear weapons, which I believe is one of the most important and seminal issues not only of this bill but of our defense policy today, but the only vote I was able to have on this critical issue was a motion to table. prgtoken Despite the deep differences among us, it is my hope that this Chamber can return to the collegial ways of the past--and I think that is a belief and a hope shared by my colleague Senator Inhofe from Oklahoma--and that we can hold an open amendment process that guarantees every Senator a right to a full and wholesome debate on amendments and those issues that matter most to those Senators. There are critical issues that pertain to our national security and the welfare of our servicemembers, and they must be addressed through bipartisan dialogue and compromise. It is my hope that moving forward we can return this Chamber to regular order and hold an open amendment process. prgtoken Despite my frustrations with this process, I am pleased with the overall prgtoken result of this bill. We successfully incorporated 46 amendments from both s and into the bill. These amendments further strengthen the bill and provide additional resources to the Department of Defense which allows them to carry out their important mission. prgtoken Looking ahead, the budget agreement that covered the fiscal year 2018 and fiscal year 2019 NDAAs will expire next year, meaning a return to sequestration and budget caps, unless a new agreement is reached. At this time when our military is facing readiness shortfalls and numerous global threats, we cannot afford a budgetary retrenchment. We must continue to work together to address these issues, and I am confident and hopeful we will find a way forward. prgtoken I would like to particularly thank Senator Inhofe for his leadership t
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION BILL
Dianne Feinstein (Democrat, CA) \u2014 2018-6-18

I rise today to discuss my vote in opposition to the 2019 National Defense Authorization Act. prgtoken First, I would like to thank Chairman McCain and Ranking Member Reed for including the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act in this defense authorization bill. prgtoken I worked with Senator Cornyn to develop this important piece of legislation to update the role of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, CFIUS. prgtoken Our bill would expand CFIUS's authority to review foreign investments in the United States and potentially block those that pose a risk to our national security. I hope our bill is retained by the conferees and included in the final defense authorization bill so that it can become law. prgtoken The defense bill we are considering today also authorizes funding for a number of programs critical to California's defense industry. That includes funding for three ships: two oilers and an additional expeditionary support base ship. All three are vital to the shipbuilding industry in southern California. prgtoken The bill also continues production of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter and F-18 Super Hornet aircraft, which, when coupled with the B-21 Raider, will help maintain California's edge in aerospace. prgtoken However, I am deeply disappointed that the defense authorization bill also includes two nuclear weapons-related provisions that I strongly oppose. prgtoken The first is the inclusion of $65 million to develop a new low-yield submarine-launched ballistic missile. I vehemently oppose the development of any new nuclear weapons, and I oppose the funding included in this bill for that purpose. prgtoken I remember when the United States dropped nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It is seared into my memory. prgtoken My greatest hope is that humanity will never see the use of nuclear weapons again. My deepest fear, however, is that so-called low-yield nuclear weapons make such a repetition more--not less--likely. prgtoken The administration has argued that it needs new nuclear weapons to respond in kind to a potential Russian first-use of a low-yield weapon. That line of argument makes clear that the administration is contemplating actually using nuclear weapons to fight ``limited'' nuclear wars. We are kidding ourselves if we think there is such a thing as a ``limited'' nuclear war. prgtoken We should listen to the wise words of Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, who said in February: ``I don't think there is any such thing as a `tactical nuclear weapon.' Any nuclear weapon used any time is a strategic game-changer.'' That is particularly true with the low-yield weapon included in this bill. We already have 1,550 strategic nuclear weapons. We have hundreds more low-yield weapons. prgtoken We are building new nuclear ballistic missile submarines, new long- range bombers, new intercontinental ballistic missiles, new nuclear cruise missiles, and new fi
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019
Kirsten E. Gillibrand (Democrat, NY) \u2014 2018-6-18

I rise to speak about the humanitarian crisis happening right now in our country at the border-- something I implore my colleagues to fight to stop. The Department of Homeland Security is tearing young children from the arms of their parents. They are traumatizing infants and children, and Congress needs urgently to act. prgtoken I know we have disagreements about immigration policy in this Chamber, and I know we have disagreements about how we should fix our immigration system, which we have desperately needed to fix for decades. Surely, we must be able to agree that Federal agents should not be tearing young children from the arms of their parents. We must be able to agree that families with infants should not be forcibly separated. prgtoken Where is the outrage? Where is the urgency? prgtoken I hear my colleagues speak all the time about Federal Government overreach. If this isn't Federal Government overreach, what is? This is the moment that they have gone too far. One mother was breastfeeding her infant. A Federal agent took that baby out of her mother's arms, handcuffed her, and arrested her. prgtoken Where is that baby now? How is that baby doing? Where is the baby's mother? prgtoken From mid-April through the end of last month, almost 2,000 children were separated from adults at the border. Nearly 50 times a day on American soil, our government has separated a child from their parents, creating fear and terror in their lives. Just today, it was reported that the Department of Homeland Security is now holding 11,785 minors-- 11,785 minors. This is a disgrace. prgtoken One worker at a detention center for children just resigned as a conscientious objector, and he described the children being held there as a ``traumatized population that has no clue what's going on.'' He said the staff was not prepared at all to look after 4- and 5-year-olds who were coming into these detention centers. He said the kids were screaming and crying for their moms and dads. Pediatricians who met these children were calling it ``government-sanctioned child abuse.'' prgtoken One of our colleagues in the House was able to meet with mothers whose children were taken from them at the border. She said that in some cases, the mothers were ``literally sitting in a room next to where the children were being held and could hear their children screaming.'' prgtoken Have we not studied our own history? This is the kind of thing we read about in history books and to which we shake our heads in disgust. We ask ourselves: How did we let this happen? We ask ourselves: Why didn't Congress stop this? Why didn't anyone do anything? Don't we remember what happened during World War II with the Japanese internment camps? Children were traumatized, and families were damaged--in some cases permanently. The memorial to remind us of this is a stone's throw from the U.S. Capitol. It is just for the purpose of reminding us to never do it ag