mesut/congress_speeches huggingface dataset:
BROWNFIELDS ENHANCEMENT, ECONOMIC REDEVELOPMENT, AND REAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2017
Peter A. DeFazio (Democrat, OR) \u2014 2017-12-1

I include in the Record the following letter: The United States Conference of Mayors, National Association of Counties, National League of Cities, and National Association of Regional Councils, March 28, 2017. Hon. Greg Walden, Chairman, Energy and Commerce Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Hon. Frank J, Pallone, Jr Ranking Member, Energy and Commerce Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Hon. Bill Shuster, Chairman, Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Hon. Peter DeFazio, Ranking Member, Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Chairman Walden, Ranking Member Pallone, Chairman Shuster and Ranking Member DeFazio: On behalf of the nation's mayors, cities, counties and regions, we strongly encourage you to reauthorize and improve the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Brownfields program, which is key for both economic development and job creation In local communities across the county. Since its creation, the EPA Brownfields program has provided crucial assistance to local governments for reclaiming hazardous, polluted and underutilized properties. To date, there have been over 26,000 brownfields assessments and 1,200 brownfields cleanups nationally, which has led to over 123,000 jobs. Each of the $22 billion federal dollars that has been invested since the program was established in 2002 has leveraged approximately $16 in other investments, close to $400 billion in total. While many communities have benefited from brownfields redevelopment efforts under this program, the U.S. Government Accountability Office estimates there are between 400,000 and 600,000 remaining brownfields sites throughout the United States. To build upon these past successes and assist in the cleanup, reuse and redevelopment of remaining sites, some key Improvements to the program are needed. Increase or maintain authorization amounts While we understand the fiscal challenges and constraints faced by the U.S. Congress, we strongly encourage you to authorize and fully fund the Brownfields program to at least previously authorized levels. The Brownfields program has a proven track record of leveraging additional investments, creating new jobs, and redeveloping new properties, while creating additional tax revenues. At current appropriation levels, EPA has had to turn away many highly qualified applicants due to a lack of funding. EPA estimates that for the past 5 years, over 1,700 requests for viable projects were not awarded money because of lim
TAX CUTS AND JOBS ACT--CONTINUED
Al Franken (Democrat, MN) \u2014 2017-12-1

I rise this evening in opposition to the tax bill before us. I think the problem in our country isn't that wealthy people in this country aren't wealthy enough; the problem is, the wealth gap has grown to the highest levels in my lifetime. This bill would make that wealth gap even bigger. prgtoken Senator Paul Wellstone often said: ``We all do better when we all do better.'' He knew the economy does better when there is a strong middle class and when working families have more money to spend. Unfortunately, the tax bill does the opposite of what Paul Wellstone argued for. Instead of helping working families, it raises taxes on at least 14 million of them, and it uses this revenue to give $1 trillion to the superrich, all while adding $1.5 trillion to our national debt. This is, at its core, an awful bill. prgtoken When President took office, he pledged that he would look out for the ``forgotten men and women,'' not the wealthy. This bill is a betrayal of that commitment. prgtoken I believe Congress should work on a bipartisan basis to make our Tax Code fairer and simpler for working families, and that is what I have advocated for since I joined the Senate. have made a good- faith effort to work in a bipartisan manner on a tax reform bill with s, but s have chosen, from the very start of this Congress, to take a purely partisan approach that has left entirely out of the discussion. prgtoken We all know this bill is being rushed through Congress so s can claim a legislative achievement by the end of the year. That is not the way you get a fairer, simpler Tax Code. You get a fairer, simpler Tax Code by having hearings with outside witnesses. prgtoken You get a fairer, simpler Tax Code by giving Americans an opportunity to weigh in as it is being drafted, to review the bill, and to share their views. You get a simpler, fairer Tax Code by doing it in a bipartisan manner, not by excluding entirely from the drafting of the bill. prgtoken The fast-track process s are using is just like the s' equally partisan, equally secretive, and equally rushed attempt to repeal and replace Care earlier this year. Americans deserve better. prgtoken In their effort to get this bill through before Americans realize just how damaging it is, many s have made some misleading claims about it. prgtoken For example, s often cite the fact that the bill would double the standard deduction that families can claim on their tax return. That is true, but they always seem to leave out the very important fact that their bill would also eliminate the personal exemption. The personal exemption is about $4,000 for each family member, so when compared with a $12,000 increase in the standard deduction, it means households with two parents and more than one child would be worse off under the tax bill than under
TAX CUTS AND JOBS ACT--CONTINUED
Claire McCaskill (Democrat, MO) \u2014 2017-12-1

. So the rationale is, if you choose not to take Federal money, then your endowment is no longer subject to any tax even though the endowment money comes from people who get a deduction for the money they give, correct? The endowment comes from donors. I thought the reason we were taxing the endowments is because the people who were giving the money were getting a tax deduction when they put it there.
PRESERVING ACCESS TO MANUFACTURED HOUSING ACT OF 2017
Maxine Waters (Democrat, CA) \u2014 2017-12-1

what you just heard was a description of what some who represent some of these rural communities are doing for them or not doing for them. They say: Vulnerable consumer, you can have a loan at 18 percent. We know you can't afford it, and we will just come and repossess your manufactured housing when you can't pay. prgtoken For the chairman, I will take all the time that he would yield to me to continue this discussion and let people know exactly what is going on. prgtoken , I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison), who is a true Congressional Progressive Caucus champion and a senior member of the Financial Services Committee.
TAX CUTS AND JOBS ACT--CONTINUED
Amy Klobuchar (Democrat, MN) \u2014 2017-12-1

I thank Senator Nelson for his leadership on this motion. It is a very simple motion for a very simple proposition; that is, that the Tax Code should be simpler. That is true. We should make it more streamlined. That is true, but our focus should be helping the people of America. prgtoken Our problem with the bill that is on the floor right now is that it is weighted much too heavily in terms of helping the wealthiest among us and not the middle class. Senator Nelson's amendment, which I am a proud cosponsor of, gets right to the meat of this, to the bread and butter, to helping the middle class with their groceries--since I used meat and bread and butter--but also with their mortgages, with paying for college, with everything they need to do. Our problem with the bill right now is that too much of it goes to the top. prgtoken In fact, when you look at the numbers, it is quite startling. The first prgtoken thing you notice for the middle class is that $1.4 trillion in additional debt comes out of this bill. Now, our colleagues were claiming until yesterday, well, that is going to be offset with all this economic growth we are going to see. What did we find out? Even when you consider that--and this is by the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation that looked at this. They are like the umpire. They do the scorecard. They looked at this, and they said: Yes, it is about 1.4, $1.5 trillion in debt. It does produce some economic growth, but guess what. The net is over a trillion dollars in debt. prgtoken Now, whose shoulder is that going to be on? That debt is going to be on the middle class and their kids and their grandkids, and that is the No. 1 reason why I am so concerned about this bill and why I stood with 17 other , including Senator Nelson, just this last week and said: Come to the table. This is your moment for our colleagues on the side of the aisle. While the White House is busy sending out tweets and going after this person and that person and this group and that group, someone has to govern, and this is their moment to govern, to work with us on a bill that doesn't add this debt that gives the middle class more than just a lump of debt in their stocking. prgtoken What Senator Nelson's amendment smartly does is, it says: Let's go back and actually have hearings. Let's go back and in a deficit-neutral manner help the middle class. That is what we have to do. prgtoken Even though we appeared to be very close to voting on this bill, we still don't know what exactly is in the final version of this bill. We know what isn't in it. Where is this Buffett rule that would make it more fair for everyone? What are we doing about the oil giveaways? What are we doing about the carried interest loophole? None of this is in the bill. Instead, there is $1.4 trillion in debt. So that is why I strongly support Senator Nelson's amendment. prgtoken I would also add other amendments that
PRESERVING ACCESS TO MANUFACTURED HOUSING ACT OF 2017
Kyrsten Sinema (Democrat, AZ) \u2014 2017-12-1

thank you to Chairman Hensarling and Congressman Barr for working with me to make housing more affordable for Arizona families. prgtoken , I rise in support of H.R. 1699, the Preserving Access to Manufactured Housing Act. Manufactured housing is an important form of affordable housing in Arizona, particularly for rural and underserved communities. More than 300,000 families in Arizona live in manufactured homes. Low- and moderate-income families count on manufactured homes as an affordable choice. prgtoken Just last week, we had the honor of working with Habitat for Humanity to help Ed, a Vietnam veteran living in Tempe, spread gravel and improve his front yard. Ed first moved to the Valley in 1950 and bought a manufactured home a few years ago. prgtoken If Ed wanted to use his VA eligibility to purchase a home, the realtor would be able to connect Ed with a number of lenders who offer VA home loans. However, if Ed wanted to purchase a manufactured home, he would be instructed to go to a table by himself and sift through the countless brochures and loan programs to decide which lender is best. This is a daunting and discouraging process for most borrowers, especially for first-time homebuyers. prgtoken Current regulations harm existing manufactured homeowners and potential buyers by curtailing consumer access to manufactured home loans or assistance in the home-buying process. These regulations unintentionally make it more difficult to match borrowers with lenders who can help them in a timely and efficient manner. prgtoken H.R. 1699 is a commonsense fix for Ed and the hundreds of thousands of Arizonans who own or are looking to own manufactured homes. The bill ensures that regulations give homebuyers more options, better advice, and greater confidence when buying a new home. The bill also amends the definition of a high cost mortgage and corresponding thresholds to ensure that consumers of small-balance mortgage loans will have the opportunity to access mortgage credit. prgtoken It was a privilege to meet Ed and thank him for his service to our country. We should make it easier, not harder, for veterans and fellow Arizonans like him to purchase a home of their choice. I urge members of both parties to join me in supporting H.R. 1699.
WORLD AIDS DAY
Barbara Lee (Democrat, CA) \u2014 2017-12-1

I rise today to commemorate World AIDS Day. The theme this year is Increasing Impact Through Transparency, Accountability, and Partnerships. prgtoken First, I would like to thank Leader Pelosi for her steadfast commitment to fighting HIV and AIDS and for guaranteeing strong United States leadership in this area. prgtoken As the cofounder and co-chair of the bipartisan Congressional HIV/ AIDS Caucus with my good friend, Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, we have seen significant progress that we have made in the global fight against HIV. prgtoken Year after year, Congress has come together in a bipartisan way to stop the spread of this disease. From PEPFAR and the Global Fund to fight AIDS, tuberculosis, and malaria--which I was very proud to help write--to the Ryan White CARE Act and the Minority AIDS Initiative, the United States has been a global leader in committing the critical resources needed to end this disease both here at home and abroad. prgtoken Partly due to our efforts, over 20 million people around the world have access to lifesaving antiretroviral treatment. Twenty million people getting lifesaving medicine is more than the population of the State of New York. So in memory of those who died much too soon, let's recommit ourselves to ending AIDS by 2030 and realizing an AIDS-free generation.
TAX CUTS AND JOBS ACT--CONTINUED
Chris Van Hollen (Democrat, MD) \u2014 2017-12-1

. Thank you, . prgtoken I see Senator Menendez from New Jersey has arrived. He is a cosponsor, together with Senator Cantwell and myself, on this amendment, and I want to thank Senator Cantwell for her leadership. She has covered a lot of important points. prgtoken The main one is, from the beginning of our Federal Tax Code in 1913, we have established a principle in the United States to avoid double taxation. It makes no sense that any citizens of this country send a dollar of tax to their State governments to help schools or roads in their State, and then they are turned around and taxed on that same dollar by the Federal Government, but that is exactly what this tax plan is doing. prgtoken Now, weeks and weeks ago, the leader, Senator McConnell, and the of the House, Paul Ryan, made these public statements about how these tax bills weren't going to raise taxes on anybody. They both had to publicly reverse those statements because, in order to provide huge tax breaks to the biggest corporations of this country, this bill will require millions and millions of middle-class families to increase their taxes, and a main vehicle for doing that is by removing the deduction for those citizens. prgtoken I am just going to give you some quick numbers: 100 million Americans today use the deduction for State and local taxes. In fact, half of the families in my State of Maryland use it. Thirty-eight percent of taxpayers making between $50,000 and $75,000 claim the State and local deduction. That is 7.6 million households. Fifty-six percent of taxpayers who make under $100,000 claim the State and local deduction, and 86 percent of taxpayers making under $200,000 claim the State and local deduction. prgtoken It is wrong to double tax those families in order to provide a huge tax break for big corporations. Just to add insult to injury, the corporations in our State still get to deduct their State and local taxes. We just don't let the people in our State do the same thing. prgtoken Let's adopt this amendment.
TAX CUTS AND JOBS ACT--CONTINUED
Christopher Murphy (Democrat, CT) \u2014 2017-12-1

. Thank you very much, . prgtoken I was paying attention to my social media feed, and I have seen that Senators on the side are starting to announce which way they are voting. I saw that Corker is a no and Collins is a yes. I don't know what they are a no or a yes on. How can you declare which way you are going to vote on a bill that you haven't read, on a bill that your constituents haven't seen? prgtoken Senator Wyden just piled up what looked to be about 6 inches' worth of text in front of the Senate floor. There is no possible way that any Member of this body has read all of that. There is no way that in the time between when it is released to Senators and when we vote, anyone-- even from the very close States--is going to be able to get back to their constituents and ask them what they think about this piece of legislation. I guess I would say I have never seen anything like it, but we just went through it earlier this year when we were given about an hour to look at a complete reform of one-sixth of the American economy, the healthcare system. prgtoken We are now being asked to vote this evening on a multitrillion-dollar reform of our Tax Code, and not a single U.S. Senator will have read it. There is no way you will have read it. I just saw how big it is. Maybe s have read it because they have seen it in these secret negotiations, but I can guarantee you that Senate will not have read this because we have been kept out of the loop on all of these negotiations designed to get to 50 votes--not to 60 votes, not to 70 votes, not a consensus product that can get and ic support. prgtoken I got here in 2007 when took control of the House and the Senate. I remember during those 2 years all sorts of consternation from s about how bills were being rushed through the process. In reaction to that, when s took back control of the House, they instituted something called a 72-hour rule that said that we couldn't vote on a piece of legislation unless Members have been able to see it for 72 hours. We need a 72-minute rule. I don't think we are going to be able to look at this legislation for more than 72 minutes--a multitrillion-dollar reform of the U.S. Tax Code--before we are asked to vote on it. prgtoken Senator Wyden and others have been waving around this list of lobbyist asked-for amendments that fill up an entire page. We are not going to get 72 minutes to look at this, never mind have a single conversation with our constituents. It is dark out. The bill is going to be introduced on a Friday night. We are going to vote on it overnight. This is supposed to be the world's greatest deliberative body. It is not supposed to work like this. prgtoken It is not a middle-class tax cut. I am not going to deny that there are some people in the middle class who are going to get their taxes lowered by this bill, but the middle-class tax
TAX CUTS AND JOBS ACT--CONTINUED
Maria Cantwell (Democrat, WA) \u2014 2017-12-1

I come to the floor with my colleague from Maryland to talk about the State and local tax deduction. prgtoken I thank the ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee for his hard work on trying to articulate what is fair tax policy for Americans. Senator Wyden and I come from parts of the country with probably some of the most unique tax codes. He doesn't have a sales tax in Oregon. We don't have an income tax in Washington. prgtoken We are not an expensive tax State. We are not an expensive tax State. There are other States such as Texas, Nevada, and Florida that also don't have an income tax. Under this bill, those States and the citizens of those States, like many others, are going to be penalized. Middle-class Americans are going to have their taxes raised to give a tax break to corporations. prgtoken So while we might want to discuss what is fair tax policy as it relates to the competitiveness of our economy, the good news for the people of the State of Washington is that we have very competitive businesses, whether it is Microsoft or Amazon or Starbucks or Costco or Boeing. They are all working hard. They are all working in multiple places, and yes, they are all doing really, really well. prgtoken The question is, Do we need to reduce their corporate rate so significantly, and to do so, take money out of the pockets of middle- class families across the United States of America? prgtoken The reason I mention Senator Wyden and the States of Oregon and Washington, is that, even though we have a unique tax code, our State's economy has grown faster than the national average every year since World War II. That is to say, the uniqueness of our tax code has not hurt us, and yet in the State of Washington we have had the highest minimum wage for a long time in the United States. Now we are raising it in various parts of our State. We have had a unique view of where our revenue should come from. prgtoken Why now? Why now? After 100 years of tax deductibility by taxpayers in this country, why are you taking away their ability to deduct only to give a tax break to corporations that are making record profits? After 100 years, why are you doing this? prgtoken Well, I think some of my colleagues have said it best. They have called it double-taxation. You are going ahead after 100 years and saying it is OK to tax the same amount that we pay to the State that you also are going to tax at the Federal level. As one article mentioned, ``Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist Papers said the Federal Government might try to monopolize taxation to the entire exclusion and destruction of State governments.'' prgtoken That is right. Our Founding Fathers said: Do not have double taxation. So for 100 years--100 years--we protected the citizens of this country. Yet someone over there is thinking: Do you know what? I need $1.4 trillion. Where can I get it? Let's do it on the backs of middle-class families, because they