mesut/congress_speeches huggingface dataset:
AUTHORITY FOR COMMITTEES TO MEET
Jerry Moran (Republican, KS) \u2014 2017-3-21

I have 7 requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority leaders. prgtoken Pursuant to Rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate: Armed Services Committee prgtoken The Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, March 21, 2017, at 9:30 a.m to receive testimony on U.S. Policy and Strategy in Europe. committee on the judiciary prgtoken The Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate, on March 21, 2017, at 9:30 a.m to continue a hearing entitled ``The Nomination of the Honorable Neil M. Gorsuch''. committee on energy and natural resources prgtoken The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate in order to hold a hearing on Tuesday, March 21, 2017, beginning at 10 a.m. committee on health, education, labor, and pensions prgtoken The Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, March 21, 2017, at 10 a.m. Special committee on aging prgtoken The Special Committee on Aging is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, March 21, 2017. Select committee on intelligence prgtoken The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence is authorized to meet during the session of the 115th Congress of the U.S. Senate on Tuesday, March 21, 2017 from 2:30 p.m. prgtoken subcommittee on consumer protection, product safety, insurance, and data security prgtoken The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation is authorized to hold a meeting during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, March 21, 2017, at 2:30 p.m. prgtoken The Committee will hold Subcommittee Hearing on ``Staying a Step Ahead: Fighting Back Against scams Used to Defraud Americans.''
TAKING THE INNOCENCE OF A CHILD IS SHAMEFUL
Ted Poe (Republican, TX) \u2014 2017-3-21

a 14-year-old girl last week was kidnapped off the streets of Houston, Texas. After being held against her will for 5 days, she was taken to a motel, where she met a person named Denise Coronado. prgtoken But Coronado was no friend. Instead, she threatened the girl. Coronado ground cigarettes into the girl's body. She threatened everyone that the child loved. She published photographs of the girl on backpage.com, selling her on the marketplace of sex slavery. In a 1- week period, the young girl was forced to have sex with more than 20 men. Finally she escaped. prgtoken But, , the reality is that the victim sometimes never truly escapes. The horrors sometimes live with them forever. We can no longer be ignorant to modern day slavery. My legislation, the Shame Act, gives Federal judges the ability to publish the names and photographs of convicted buyers and sellers of humans. prgtoken Those who sell or buy the innocence of children should be shamed for all to see. Put their photographs on backpage.com. prgtoken And that is just the way it is.
PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL OF A RULE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Lamar Alexander (Republican, TN) \u2014 2017-3-21

President 's nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to be a member of the U.S. Supreme Court is being considered this week in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Soon, the nomination is likely to move to the floor for debate. prgtoken Some have suggested that instead of allowing a majority of Senators to decide whether to approve the nomination of Judge Gorsuch, there should be first a cloture vote to determine whether to cut off debate. Cutting off debate requires the approval of 60 Senators, so if 41 of the 46 ic Senators vote not to cut off debate, there would never be an up-or-down majority vote to approve Judge Gorsuch. In other words, the 41 ic Senators would have filibustered to death the Gorsuch nomination. prgtoken Filibustering to death the Gorsuch nomination--or any Presidential nomination, for that matter--flies in the face of 230 years of Senate tradition. Throughout the Senate's history, approval of even the most controversial Presidential nominations has required only a majority vote. For example, in 1991 President George H.W. nominated Clarence Thomas to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. The debate was bitter. The Senate confirmed Judge Thomas narrowly, 52 to 48. Although the Senate rules allowed any Senator to try to filibuster the nomination to death, none did. In fact, Senate rules have always allowed Senators the option to filibuster to death a Presidential nomination; yet it has almost never happened. According to the former Senate Historian, with one possible exception, which I will mention in a minute, the number of Supreme Court Justices in our country's history who have been denied their seat by filibuster is zero. The number of Cabinet members in our country's history who have been denied their seats by filibuster is zero. The number of Federal district judges in our country's history who have been denied their seats by filibuster is zero. And until 2003, the number of Federal circuit judges in our country's history who have been denied their seats by filibuster was zero. prgtoken Senator Everett Dirksen did not filibuster President Lyndon Johnson's Presidential nominations. Senator Robert Byrd did not filibuster President Reagan's nominees. Senator Howard Baker did not filibuster President Carter's nominees. Senator Bob Dole did not filibuster President Clinton's nominees. During most of the 20th century, when one party controlled the White House and the Senate 70 percent of the time, the minority never filibustered to death a single Presidential nominee. prgtoken On the other hand, there have been plenty of filibusters on legislation--so many that in 1917, the Senate adopted a cloture rule as a way to end filibusters. The rule was amended in 1949, 1959, 1975, 1979, and 1986--always in response to filibusters on legislation, never on nominations. It was the 1975 change that established the current cloture standard of 60 votes to end deba
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 372, COMPETITIVE HEALTH INSURANCE REFORM ACT OF 2017
Doug Collins (Republican, GA) \u2014 2017-3-21

the balance of my time. prgtoken I would just like to remind those from the House that if you do defeat this rule, you will not vote on this commonsense piece of legislation. So let's at least put the correct procedural order out there. prgtoken We need to vote ``yes'' on this rule and get on to the underlying piece of legislation, which is a piece that has passed this House not only unanimously by voice vote in the Congress but also with an overwhelming vote just recently in the ic administration as well. So we are moving forward on this. prgtoken I think what is interesting here, and what I have worked on, and we are going to have a lot of discussion on for the next 2 days is repealing and replacing Care. I think it was interesting that my friend--we share many a night and day in the Rules Committee, we share different opinions, but he made mention of the elephant in the room. I will just make mention of the donkey in the room. prgtoken It is amazing to me now that we are actually concerned about people losing health care. We are actually concerned about prices going up. We are actually concerned about these issues that have been going on for 7 years. We are having an $800 billion tax because we have removed the taxes and impediments of Care. We are actually--instead of mandating the folks that they buy insurance that they can't afford and can't use, we are actually getting a marketplace that will actually give them better choices and results. prgtoken I think the interesting part here is not knowing the cost and benefits. Good gracious. All we have to do is look back over the last 7 years, . When we understand what is going on, let's also, as we throw out the discussion--it was made in comment by my friend, 7 years to fix. You can't fix broken in this regard. When he goes about it traditionally wrong, it is not fixing. When you take away the markets, when you take away the individual market, and when you are taking away the very incentives that actually are the underpinnings of our health care to enlarge and grow, if your goals were to reduce and expand, then you failed miserably. You have not reduced costs, they have gone up. You have not expanded choices, they have gone down. prgtoken I have listened to it about as much as I can right now. We are going to have the next 2 days to give people health. It is why we are over here for the majority speaking because of the failure of the ACA in Care. When we understand that, then we can look at pieces of legislation like the Competitive Health Insurance Reform Act that should have been part of this a long time ago. Yet, we choose to begin discussions about a failure. It is about a failure. prgtoken Choose the status quo. Squint your eyes, look real hard, it is not getting worse, it is really okay, just help us tweak it, help it get better. prgtoken It is not getting any better. In fact, any insurance company is
COMPETITIVE HEALTH INSURANCE REFORM ACT OF 2017
Bob Goodlatte (Republican, VA) \u2014 2017-3-21

the McCarran-Ferguson Act was originally passed to leave the regulation of the business of insurance with the States and to allow insurers to engage in certain procompetitive collaborative activities. prgtoken This legislation limits significant uncertainty and unnecessary litigation that would likely result from a broader McCarran-Ferguson repeal through the use of safe harbors for such historically procompetitive collaborative activities, specifically the collection and distribution of historical loss data, the determination of loss development factors, the performance of actuarial services that do not involve restraints of trade, and the use of common forms that are not coercive. prgtoken Absent these safeguards, insurers will likely disengage from certain proconsumer collaborative activities, eliminating or impeding smaller insurers from competing and disincentivizing larger insurers from exploring new products and markets. This will lead to further market consolidation and fewer product choices, the impact of which will eventually be borne by the consumer. prgtoken These narrow safe harbors create a presumption that certain procompetitive activities can continue while maintaining regulation and oversight to the extent any activity crosses over into a restraint of trade. As a result, insurers can continue to engage in proconsumer business practices, and will be encouraged to provide a diverse range of offerings at fair and reasonable prices. prgtoken There is no reason to make an exception to these safe harbors. Therefore, I oppose the motion. I urge my colleagues to reject this motion to recommit and to support the underlying bill. prgtoken , .
NOMINATION OF NEIL GORSUCH
Mitch McConnell (Republican, KY) \u2014 2017-3-21

. On another matter, , yesterday Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch came before the Judiciary Committee for the first day of his confirmation hearing. In his opening statement, Judge Gorsuch showed why so many lawyers and judges strongly support his nomination as a thoughtful and fairminded judge who understands the particular role of the Federal courts in our Republic and who has discharged his judicial office accordingly. prgtoken Last week, two of his former colleagues on the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals added their voices to this growing chorus. The endorsement of him was published in the Washington Post. Judge Gorsuch's hearing continues today with Senators on the committee asking him questions. As they prgtoken do, we should keep in mind the counsel of his former Tenth Circuit colleagues--both as to their experience with Judge Gorsuch on the bench and their view of our role in questioning him now that he is before the Senate. Judges Deanell Reece Tacha and Robert Henry both served with Judge Gorsuch on the Tenth Circuit. Both were chief judges of that court, in fact, and both have gone on to careers in academia: Judge Tacha as dean of the Pepperdine University School of Law and Judge Henry as president and chief executive of Oklahoma City University. Judge Tacha was appointed to the circuit court by President Reagan while Judge Henry was appointed to the circuit court by President Clinton. They describe themselves as a lifelong and , respectively. prgtoken They write that ``predictions abound as to how Judge Neil Gorsuch--if confirmed--would lean or even vote on this or that case. . . . But these essentially political discussions tend to distort the role of judges in our government.'' They remind us that the `` `independence of the judges' is a most sacred tradition in U.S. constitutional law, requiring all judges to have no obligations to those who nominated or confirmed them.'' Let me repeat that. They note that the principle of judicial independence requires judges not to have obligations to those who nominate them or those who confirm them. prgtoken In that regard, Judges Tacha and Henry remind us that ``[d]etailed discussions during the confirmation process on issues that might come before a judge are not proper; in fact, they would in all likelihood require recusals from the cases discussed.'' They point out how the judicial process is different from the confirmation process. They observe that ``controversies that go before the court often bring unique and complicated facts that could completely change a judge's sincerely espoused view.'' Legal research is ``[a]nother critically important input into judicial decisions.'' Legal research might reveal precedent that overrides a judge's ``previously held views or even logical interpretations of legal text.'' They emphasize that the judicial process is the collection of ``[t]hese factors--tradition, independence, pre
ADVOCATING FOR PATIENT-CENTERED HEALTH CARE
Ralph Lee Abraham (Republican, LA) \u2014 2017-3-21

I rise today as a practicing physician who believes that we must repeal the disaster that Care has brought us and return to a patient-centered system. prgtoken My patients have dealt with skyrocketing premiums, unaffordable deductibles, and a formulary so restrictive it is an insult to call it a real treatment. prgtoken Medicaid expansion is no better and gives only the illusion of sound coverage. These patients can't find doctors. They can't find specialists who will see them, which results in more hospital admissions, more unnecessary hospital referrals, more expensive trips to the emergency room, and higher costs to the program and to the taxpayers. prgtoken There is nothing compassionate about cramming more people into a failed system just so politicians can score political points. All they have done is force a second-class insurance onto first-class people. prgtoken All Americans deserve better than Care. We can provide a better healthcare delivery system for them where everyone has access to affordable care, and it starts with the passage of the American Health Care Act.
REMEMBERING JOHN BRUCE FERY
Mike Crapo (Republican, ID) \u2014 2017-3-21

today I wish to honor the life of John Bruce Fery, a friend and mentor. prgtoken John's obituary beautifully conveyed a sense of who he was: ``John's journey took him from challenging early years as a latchkey kid with a working mom to remarkable lifetime accomplishments. He loved God, his family, his community, and his country. He loved the outdoors, sunshine, and John Wayne. He had a zest for life and a work ethic that was incomparable, while his commanding presence, charming smile, and quick-witted humor made him adored by family and friends. He was captivated by the joys of family life, the challenges of business, the warmth of friendships, the satisfaction of philanthropic work, and the stories each brought to his life.'' prgtoken On February 16, 1930, John was born in Bellingham, WA, to Margaret and Carl Fery. John lost his father at a young age, and he and his mother moved to Seattle, where he graduated from Roosevelt High School and attended the University of Washington before serving in the U.S. Navy during the Korean war. He married his wife, Dee, in 1953, and obtained his masters of business administration from Stanford University before his extensive, much respected career in the pulp and paper industry. He led the Boise Cascade Company for more than two decades, taking on the position of president and chief executive officer in 1972 and chairman of the board in 1978. Throughout his 37- year career with the company, he built a legacy of sound judgement and expertise that led to his many honors, awards, and service on multiple boards. prgtoken In addition to his esteemed business career, John and Dee have given generously to many philanthropic efforts. His obituary aptly highlights some of their significant contributions to the community: ``Whether attending the new Horsethief Reservoir Y Camp in Cascade, Idaho, learning about Birds of Prey at the World Center, enjoying the Idaho Shakespeare Festival and the park that he and Dee donated, attending Medical School through the WWAMI program which John helped found as a means of training physicians for Idaho, staying at St. Alphonsus Regional Medical Center where John chaired the board and established its Foundation, receiving a grant from the Idaho Community Foundation, which exists today due to John's leadership in its formation and growth, or receiving a scholarship to Boise's Bishop Kelly High School, the University of Idaho, or Stanford, people will have experiences made possible by John and Dee's vison and generosity.'' prgtoken John was also a dear friend to me. He encouraged me and was instrumental in inspiring my public service. His guidance, advice, and insight are forever etched in my life's path, and I am deeply grateful for the time he took to help shape my service. I extend my deepest sympathies to Dee; their sons, Brent, Bruce, and Michael and their families; and their many other family members, loved ones, and friends.
IN RECOGNITION OF THE HONORABLE WILLIAM F. ADOLPH, JR. OF SPRINGFIELD, PA
Patrick Meehan (Republican, PA) \u2014 2017-3-21

I rise today to congratulate the Honorable William F. Adolph, Jr. of Springfield, PA on his retirement and thank him for his decades of service to Delaware County families. Bill is retiring as Representative from the 165th Legislative District in the Pennsylvania General Assembly, where he served as Chairman of the Appropriations Committee. After more than thirty years of public service, Bill has earned a record as a champion for the middle class, small and growing businesses and fiscal responsibility in burg. Throughout his career in public service, first as a township commissioner in Springfield, as a lawmaker in burg and ultimately as the Chairman of the Appropriations Committee, Bill has always fought to ensure the taxpayer got the most out of every dollar government spends. He's fought to lessen the tax burden on job creators and spur economic growth. He's fought to ensure Pennsylvania's most vulnerable have access to the services they need. And he's fought to hold government accountable to the people it serves. As important as his legislative achievements have been to Pennsylvania, perhaps his greatest legacy is the role model he's been to countless young people as a coach and through his decades-long involvement with the Springfield Youth Club. He's taught generations of Springfield's young people how to conduct themselves with integrity and responsibility--both on and off the field. I thank Bill for all he's done for our state and our community, and I wish him the best in his retirement.
PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL OF A RULE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Dan Sullivan (Republican, AK) \u2014 2017-3-21

I rise to encourage my colleagues to rescind a recently promulgated regulation by the administration and to support the corresponding resolution of disapproval that the majority leader just brought up and that we unanimously moved forward to debate, H.J. Res. 69. prgtoken There are few, if any, people in the world who love their lands and wildlife more than Alaskans. In Alaska, our land is the lifeblood that sustains us, that feeds our bodies, our families, and our souls. It is a deep and enduring part of our culture. prgtoken Our hunting traditions are very much alive in Alaska. Alaskans hunt for food for cultural reasons and even for survival. There are people in my State whose families have called our beautiful and rugged lands home for thousands of years, living side-by-side with more recent arrivals. Alaska has also the well-earned reputation of having one of the best managed, most sustainable fish and game populations anywhere in America or anywhere in the world, for that matter. We have an abundance of wildlife that most States and most countries can only dream of. We do this year after year, generation after generation, through rigorous scientific processes that allow and encourage public participation through our Board of Game, Board of Fisheries, and our Fish and Game Department to make sure we manage our fish and game for sustainability, as required by the Alaska constitution, and that we take into account the needs of our citizens--the needs of Alaskans. It is not an easy process. It can be contentious, but all Alaskans take this very seriously. prgtoken In Alaska, we respect the land and everything in it. That special connection and our ability to manage our own lands and resources was explicitly recognized in Federal law when Alaska became a State. The Alaska Statehood Act passed in this body in 1958, specifically granting Alaska the authority to manage fish and wildlife on not only State lands but on Federal lands, unless Congress passes a law to the contrary. By the way, that is the same authority granted to all States. It is granted to Ohio, New Mexico--all States in America have this authority. prgtoken Further, in 1980, this body, the Congress of the United States, passed the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, designating 100 million acres of land, in my great State, as Federal conservation units, including over 70 million acres--I believe larger than the State of New Mexico--as wildlife refuges in one State. prgtoken Many Alaskans didn't like this bill. Several saw this as a massive Federal usurpation of our land, but our congressional delegation fought to include explicit provisions in this Federal law that made it abundantly clear that the State of Alaska still had primacy in managing fish and game throughout the entire State--State lands and Federal lands. prgtoken When that act was passed, it explicitly stated: ``Nothing in this act is intended to en