mesut/congress_speeches huggingface dataset:
LOWER ENERGY COSTS ACT
Raúl M. Grijalva (Democrat, AZ) \u2014 2023-3-29

. Madam Chair, there is a strategy for critical minerals, but whatever we do going forward, the essential protections that are in place for communities, the requirement of the Tribal consultation and being at the table, that is our obligation--our constitutional obligation. Those need to be followed. prgtoken The reason they need to be followed is the energy strategy that I am hearing from the s is just going back to the good old days. The good old days created these laws, these protections. prgtoken I use the example of Navajo Nation and uranium contamination. The list can go on and on and on. If we are saying that that collateral damage, those bad health impacts, that destruction of a community, that toxic cleanup left to local taxpayers, that that is okay because that is part of the past and that is part of the mining history of the past under the 1872 law, that we should replicate that now? No. prgtoken This amendment is wrong-headed. It takes us in a different direction. It cuts the public out of the process. It violates our nation-to-nation consultation responsibility. prgtoken Madam Chair, I urge a ``no'' vote, and .
RELATING TO A NATIONAL EMERGENCY DECLARED BY THE PRESIDENT ON MARCH 13, 2020
Michael F. Bennet (Democrat, CO) \u2014 2023-3-29

. I thank the Presiding Officer. prgtoken I am not offended by that. I just think some of the people at home may not want to hear that kind of language on the floor of the Senate-- but that is because they know what I am saying is true about originalism. prgtoken Because of their efforts and because they were able to elect , who was not actually read in on the joke, we ended up with three people on the Supreme Court who subscribe to that originalist view and who decided, following Justice Scalia, that if it were not a freedom in 1868, then it is not a freedom in 2023, even though it has been a freedom and a right for the last 50 years in this country. prgtoken So don't come here and say that there was somehow a consensus here when that freedom and that right has been stripped from the American people by the Supreme Court. prgtoken To my colleague from Alabama, who has left the floor--by the way, just on that point, he has now twice misrepresented my actions on this floor. So I ask unanimous consent that this article from Politico, which my colleague from Alabama put in the Record the last time he was here, misrepresenting my record, be printed in the Record. I would like to put exactly the same article in the Record so people can actually see the truth of my record
LOWER ENERGY COSTS ACT
Doris O. Matsui (Democrat, CA) \u2014 2023-3-29

. Madam Chair, I rise today to reaffirm my commitment and that of my ic colleagues to reducing energy costs for the American people. prgtoken Last Congress, we delivered a historic bill, the Inflation Reduction Act, that will save Americans money and make transformative investments to fight climate change. prgtoken The High-Efficiency Electric Home Rebate Program, in particular, gives Americans up to $14,000 to electrify their homes and improve energy efficiency. It covers up to 100 percent of electrification project costs for low-income households, who often bear the brunt of both high-energy costs and extreme weather. prgtoken I know this program will save lives and money because the Sacramento Municipal Utility District, or as we call it SMUD, is doing this in my district. Last November, I visited a constituent, a retired nurse whose home had been fully electrified and weatherized by SMUD. This includes a heat pump, water heater, induction stove, ceiling fans, energy- efficient refrigerator, and insulation. prgtoken The Inflation Reduction Act would allow SMUD to significantly expand this program, which would positively impact my constituents. prgtoken H.R. 1 would repeal the home rebate program. This legislation would repeal a program that could save Americans up to $14,000. This is nothing more than a shameless giveaway to Big Oil when we need to be accelerating the clean energy transition. prgtoken I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''
LOWER ENERGY COSTS ACT
Gabe Vasquez (Democrat, NM) \u2014 2023-3-29

let me be clear. I support our energy economy. I stand by New Mexico's energy workers, who help fuel our economy. New Mexico's Second Congressional District is one of the top energy producing areas in the entire world. In fact, Lea County, in my district, produces more oil than any other county in the United States. prgtoken About half of New Mexico's fossil fuel operations are on public lands, and royalties from the industry make up about a third of our State's annual budget. With an industry so large, there are a lot of good-paying jobs for rural New Mexicans. prgtoken Congress is not debating a bill to support energy workers that are essential to my district. We aren't even debating ways to lower energy costs for Americans, no matter what name s give this bill. This bill is about the same old thing, padding the pockets of executives at the cost of energy workers. prgtoken Just last year, as you can see, when Americans saw gas prices as high as $5 per gallon at the pump, oil and gas companies made not millions, not billions, but trillions of dollars in profit. While my constituents were paying $100 to fill up their pickup truck, Exxon chiefs were making $55 billion in profits. My colleagues across the aisle want to make them even richer at our expense. prgtoken In the Permian Basin, oil and gas production has increased nearly every year since 2013, and it is on track to reach new, even higher production prgtoken records this year. We are already unleashing American energy, but these profits aren't going to the workers in my district. They are going to the wealthy CEOs with collections of massive mansions and cars. While the energy workers in my district are living right here, in tents and temporary trailer homes, the CEOs are living right up here in Hawaii and mansions all across the world. prgtoken While our folks risk their health and safety to make these profits, we need to make sure that our priorities are in the right place. This bill is toxic, literally. It would increase pollution by removing the methane emission regulations and gutting the Clean Air Act. prgtoken Asthma rates in southeast New Mexico are the highest in the region, largely connected to methane and other emissions. s want to make this air dirtier, sending more kids to the hospital. prgtoken According to Somos Un Pueblo Unido, nearly one in two energy workers has reported an injury on the job, and most of those injuries are permanent. If this bill really cared about the energy industry, it would start by prioritizing the people who work in it. prgtoken As the Representative for New Mexico's Second Congressional District, I will always prioritize my constituents, the hardworking energy workers, over the Big Oil CEOs from outside of my district. prgtoken That is why I am working on bipartisan legislation to ensure that our energy workers aren't being forgotten. Instead of focusing on growing the record profits fo
LEGISLATIVE SESSION
Robert Menendez (Democrat, NJ) \u2014 2023-3-29

this vote that we are about to take today has deep personal significance for me and for many others. For me, as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I finally have come full circle from my vote in the House of Representatives 21 years ago when I did not support the 2002 AUMF. prgtoken I have, for my 31 years in Congress, had a standard. If the cause is right and the Nation needs it, then I will vote to send my son and daughter into war, and I will vote to send anyone else's sons and daughters into war. But if the cause is not right and the Nation truly doesn't need it, not only will I not send my son and daughter into war, I won't vote to send anyone else's sons and daughters into war. prgtoken And, at that time, as a Member of the House, I did my due diligence with all the evidence that was available, and I saw no clear and present danger, no imminent threat to the United States, and, above all, no evidence--underline ``evidence''--of weapons of mass destruction. So I voted no. I was in the minority at the time, and it was, in many respects, a tough vote, but it was the right vote. prgtoken It is significant for some of my fellow Senators who also themselves, many, have fought in the war in Iraq, and I echo what Senator Risch, the ranking member said. When our sons and daughters answer the call, they don't say: Is this the right or wrong war? prgtoken They just say: I am here to serve. prgtoken And so we honor their service, both in the Iraq war and in the Gulf war before it. And I think what we do today, actually, is the ultimate way in which we honor it. It is significant for those whose sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, friends and loved ones have fought, and it is significant because, for the first time in five decades, when Congress repealed the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, we are ending a war-- the first time in five decades. prgtoken So, today, I want to speak about what we are accomplishing together as we turn the page on that war and that chapter of American foreign policy. It has taken 21 long years for this body to reevaluate the adoption of the 2002 AUMF, and, today, we are working together--and this is the ultimate expression of what this body should be; working together, and s--to support repeal. prgtoken And I want to salute the majority leader, Senator Schumer, for giving us the time on the floor and a process for which the weightiness of what we are doing could be fully considered, and I salute him for doing so. prgtoken That makes this historic vote a bipartisan vote. With this vote, we make clear that the Iraq of 2023 is not the Iraq of 2003. Far from being a menace to the region, today's Iraq is a willing U.S. partner that seeks closer integration with its Arab neighbors. prgtoken With this vote, we can show the world that the United States is a strong partner, that we are not an occupying force, that we engage with partner countries when t
LOWER ENERGY COSTS ACT
Bill Pascrell, Jr. (Democrat, NJ) \u2014 2023-3-29

. Mr. Chair, I rise today because the s' so- called energy legislation is a farce. This bill does nothing to lower energy costs. It instead increases our deficit by $2.4 billion in handouts to Big Oil. prgtoken In Ways and Means, the Oversight Committee clearly presented a report last year that clearly showed the oil companies themselves lied. Not but the oil companies raised the price beyond belief. prgtoken I tried to offer a simple amendment to this bill that expressed support for offshore wind development, a clean energy source. That is it. It was blocked. At the same time, an amendment on their side was added, which gives hot air to fictions about offshore wind. So much for regular order. prgtoken Let me be clear, the experts agree. NOAA agrees, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the experts agree that offshore wind is not harmful to marine life. They would support it. prgtoken The author of one of these amendments was once a big supporter of wind energy. Now, he is leading the misinformation campaign against offshore wind. prgtoken How do you like that? prgtoken s don't listen to experts or science. We know that. Their attacks on clean energy are rooted in pure bad faith. prgtoken Wind power is clean energy. It supports good-paying, union manufacturing and construction jobs.
LOWER ENERGY COSTS ACT
Lori Trahan (Democrat, MA) \u2014 2023-3-29

. Mr. Chair, s' polluters over people act is a disaster of a bill. Not only does this legislation prioritize massive giveaways to Big Oil, gas corporations, and mining companies, but it sells out hardworking families who want nothing more than to breathe clean air and drink clean water. prgtoken If s are successful in making this legislation law, those corporate polluters will deplete our natural resources and destroy millions of acres of wildlife, and they will do it for pennies on the dollar. New pipelines will be constructed without the input of critical Federal agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency. prgtoken These massive corporations could be exempt from lawsuits when they spill toxic chemicals or contaminate our drinking water supplies. prgtoken This bill has the fingerprints of Big Oil lobbyists all over it. prgtoken Perhaps the most embarrassing part of this bill is how good of a return on investment it is for fossil fuel companies. prgtoken Last year, a Big Oil CEO admitted during an Energy and Commerce hearing to cashing in on stock he owned in his own company at a time when people were feeling maximum pain at the pump. He told me he did it at a 9 percent markup. That predatory behavior clearly hasn't swayed the authors of H.R. 1. prgtoken I would imagine that is because the same Big Oil corporations that stand to benefit most from this bill have donated millions to politicians over the years. They will make that money back in a matter of minutes if this legislation becomes law. prgtoken Mr. Chair, Congress' job is to serve the hardworking folks that we represent, not pad the profits of oil barons who run ExxonMobil or Shell. prgtoken Mr. Chair, our constituents deserve better, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''
PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL UNDER CHAPTER 8 OF TITLE 5, UNITED STATES CODE, OF THE RULE SUBMITTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, CORPS OF ENGINEERS, DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND THE...
Ben Ray Luján (Democrat, NM) \u2014 2023-3-29

I come before this Chamber alongside my colleagues from Maryland and Nevada to talk about the importance of our small businesses in New Mexico and across the country. prgtoken I also want to thank the chair of the Small Business Committee, Mr. Ben Cardin, for the work he has consistently done, his leadership in this space, but his understanding of what is happening across the country and the need to fight alongside our small businesses to make things better for them. So I want to thank the chairman as well. prgtoken For the past 2 years, the Senate ic majority and the White House have made it our mission to support and revitalize the small businesses that are the backbone of our local communities. We have been hard at work building economic security for the middle class, putting people back to work, and investing in the American dream. prgtoken I know every Senator in this Chamber and all Americans have a small business they depend on to get from one place to another, from one day to the next. For me, one of them is in Santa Fe, NM, Midtown Bistro, an incredible location run by a very extraordinary family. Anytime you want a good meal and a warm welcome, you just go on down to Midtown Bistro. This was the dream of restaurant owners Edmund Catanach, Melissa Salazar, and Angel Estrada--to make folks feel at home, and they do. prgtoken But when the COVID-19 pandemic hit, restaurants and small businesses all across America struggled to make ends meet without daily customers or revenue. Midtown Bistro, like so many family-owned small businesses, looked to the Federal Government and received a grant to keep things running and fulfill payroll each and every week. Melissa said that without those funds, they would have had to close their doors after decades of serving the Santa Fe community. Thankfully, that didn't happen. prgtoken Edmund, Melissa, and Angel's story is the story of thousands of small business owners who earned grant funding from the Federal Government in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. We are extremely proud to have secured more than $169 million in restaurant revitalization funds for restaurants like theirs throughout New Mexico. And that does not include everyone. prgtoken One of the first things congressional did when President took office 2 years ago was expand the Paycheck Protection Program, the Economic Injury Disaster Loan Program, and the Shuttered Venue Operators Grant Program. These expansions helped the smallest businesses--especially in rural areas--that were still hurting from the pandemic try to get back on their feet, keep workers on the payroll, keep their doors open. prgtoken have always made it a priority to help folks who need it most. This kind of relief is vital for keeping the heart of America's economy alive. prgtoken For a lot of people, it is the late-night diner that serves up the best cup of coffee in the country before the
LOWER ENERGY COSTS ACT
Raul Ruiz (Democrat, CA) \u2014 2023-3-29

. Mr. Chair, I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 1, the polluters over people act. prgtoken As a doctor, I am all too familiar with the harmful consequences of pollution and other environmental dangers on people's health. prgtoken Frontline communities near high-polluting corporations already bear too much of the burden of environmental injustice. prgtoken For example, people living near fossil fuel drilling sites are at greater risk for pre-term birth, cancer, asthma, and other respiratory diseases. prgtoken We must do more to protect people's health, not silence the voices of these vulnerable communities like this bill aims to do, not speeding up permit approvals without local families' input on projects that will go in their backyards like this bill aims to do. prgtoken This bill will also make the air we breathe dirtier and the people sicker by sacrificing key environmental protections under the Clean Air Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act, and other laws, all to increase fossil fuel energy production in a reckless and irresponsible way. prgtoken This is the wrong approach. Instead, we should secure America's energy independence with clean, reliable energy that will lower costs for families and protect people's health. prgtoken This includes building out our domestic supply chain for critical minerals like lithium while producing renewable energy. prgtoken We can do this through projects like geothermal energy production and lithium recovery at the Salton Sea in Imperial County, California, in my district. prgtoken The innovative approach we are taking there is responsible energy production with a closed-loop clean system that also creates lithium extraction with geothermal energy. prgtoken This is better for the environment, better for our communities, and better for the economy. This shows that we do not have to sacrifice health and the environment. prgtoken Mr. Chair, I urge my colleagues to reject H.R. 1 and instead work toward solutions that bring everyone together to move our country forward.
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
Benjamin L. Cardin (Democrat, MD) \u2014 2023-3-29

the Senate today has finally voted to repeal two outdated and obsolete authorizations for the use of military force--those that launched two wars against the Iraqi Government of Saddam Hussein, enacted into law in 1991 and 2002. prgtoken Yet this is not the only action we must take to protect our national security. A third AUMF, which Congress enacted in 2001 in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks on our country by the terrorist organization al- Qaida, is also outdated and ought to be repealed. This authorization was fully justified and necessary at the time, and I voted in favor of it. prgtoken It was sadly necessary to go to war in Afghanistan to remove the very real threat that al-Qaida posed from its sanctuary there. prgtoken But, as I have repeatedly argued in successive Congresses since 2014, this AUMF, too, is now obsolete. We ought to repeal it and replace it with a new AUMF that more accurately reflects the threats our country faces today. prgtoken Four Presidents from both parties have used the 2001 AUMF to target groups that did not even exist on 9/11/2001 in countries such as Yemen and prgtoken Somalia, far from the battlefield of Afghanistan. Presidents have used this AUMF in ways that those of us in Congress who voted for it could never have imagined 22 years ago. prgtoken Publicly available War Powers Resolution notifications that refer to the 2001 AUMF address more than 20 countries, including Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Libya, Somalia, Niger, Philippines, Georgia, Djibouti, Kenya, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Turkey, Jordan, Lebanon, Cameroon, Chad, Nigeria, and Saudi Arabia. prgtoken The number of countries where the U.S. military has actually resorted to military action is smaller but not insignificant. Again based on War Powers Resolution notifications, the 2001 AUMF has been publicly cited as authorization for military activity in seven countries: Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, and Niger. No administration should continue to use the 2001 AUMF--that clearly and specifically is aimed at those who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks--as a blank check for war anywhere and anytime, and it is past time for Congress to take action. prgtoken In 2014 and 2015, President relayed his intent to work with the Congress to repeal and replace the 2001 AUMF, at the time the United States was assembling the Coalition to Defeat ISIS, but we were not able to get it done. prgtoken Now, President has reiterated the same intent. In the official Statement of Administration Policy on the bill we have passed today, the White House declared its support for passage of S. 316 and goes on to say: Furthermore, President remains committed to working with Congress to ensure that outdated authorizations for the use of military force are replaced with a narrow and specific framework more appropriate to protecting Americans form modern terrorist threats. Toward th