mesut/congress_speeches huggingface dataset:
OIRA INSIGHT, REFORM, AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
Gerald E. Connolly (Democrat, VA) \u2014 2017-3-1

first, I would like to note I do oppose the underlying bill. This bill would require independent agencies, for the first time, to submit their rules to OIRA for review. prgtoken The Congressional Budget Office estimates the bill would increase direct spending by $3 million and reduce revenues by $2 million. CBO also estimates that the bill would cost Federal agencies an additional $20 million in administrative costs for compliance. prgtoken The reason the bill costs money is because it does not simply codify an executive order as its proponents suggest. The bill would require independent agencies, for the first time, to submit prgtoken their rules to OIRA for review. Independent agencies such as the FCC, SEC, and CFPB do not currently have to get the approval of the White House for regulations they issue. prgtoken Congress designed independent agencies to be just that--independent. This bill would enshrine in law the ability for the White House to engage in political interference with those agencies. prgtoken The Consumer Federation of America sent a letter to House Members today opposing this bill. The letter said, inter alia: H.R. 1009 will jeopardize independence of agencies like the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the Federal Communications Commission, as well as other independent agencies because it will give the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs the ability to review significant rules. Authorizing OIRA to conduct its own analysis would not only add pressure from the executive branch and add time and expense to that process, but would also give special interests seeking to quash a safety measure, for example, yet another avenue to prevent a rule from ever being promulgated. prgtoken Indeed, one suspects that is the intent of the bill. prgtoken A 2013 editorial in The New York Times warned of the dangers of subjecting independent agencies to OIRA review. The editorial foresaw what we are now dealing with 4 years later: ``Subjecting independent agencies to executive regulatory review would not improve the rule- making process, but it would ensure that ostensibly regulated industries are as unregulated and deregulated as possible.'' prgtoken It also said: ``There is no question that making independent agencies less independent is a bad idea.'' prgtoken My amendment would take care of that by repealing that portion of this bill. I urge all Members to support the amendment. prgtoken , .
PRESIDENT'S ADDRESS TO CONGRESS
Charles E. Schumer (Democrat, NY) \u2014 2017-3-1

before I get into the substance of my remarks, I was listening to our leader talking about compromise--not that he ever engaged in very much of it when he was leader last year--but compromise requires something to compromise over. We have nothing from the administration, nothing on infrastructure, nothing on trade, nothing even on ACA. prgtoken You want to sit down and talk? Let's see what your plans are. See if you can get your own act together before you are pointing the finger at . prgtoken The President's speech--let me say this: This President's speech was detached from this President's reality. The President, in this speech and in so many others, talks like a populist. He talks to the working people of America and promises them things. When he governs, it is nothing like that at all. He is favoring the very powerful special interests, making their lives easier, and putting more burdens on the backs of the middle class and people trying to get to the middle class. prgtoken A metaphor for this was his speech at the inauguration. He gave a speech--also aimed at the working people--and within an hour after that, he signed an Executive order that helped the banks and added about $500 to the mortgage of every new homeowner. prgtoken You can't just talk the talk, . You have to walk the walk. On issue after issue, we haven't seen anything--or negative things for the working class. prgtoken We heard about infrastructure. A month ago, the put together an infrastructure plan of $1 trillion. It was a strong plan. It has a lot of support throughout the country. prgtoken Where is the President's infrastructure plan? We haven't heard a peep about it. Some of his White House folks leaked that we will not get to infrastructure until next year. Mentioning it in a speech-- infrastructure--is not going to employ a single new worker. prgtoken What about trade? The President talked about trade, putting America first. My views tend to be closer to President 's than they were to President 's or President 's on trade. Again, what we hear in the speech and what the President actually does are contradictory. prgtoken Throughout his campaign, the President took an issue near and dear to my heart and to the heart of Senator Graham of South Carolina--China manipulating its currency. He had said over and over again in the campaign: On the first day I am President, I will sign an Executive order that labels China a currency manipulator. prgtoken They are. We know they manipulate their currency, and it has cost America hundreds of thousands, if not millions of good-paying jobs and caused a load of wealth to flow from our country to theirs. prgtoken This one didn't require congressional approval. This one didn't require a single to join in. All the President had to do was sign the order. We are now 40 days into this administration. Not only has he still not signed t
Family Planning Providers (Executive Calendar)
Patty Murray (Democrat, WA) \u2014 2017-3-1

thank you, and thank you to some of my colleagues who are going to be joining me on the floor this afternoon. prgtoken The day after President was inaugurated was one of the most inspiring I have ever gotten a chance to be part of. Millions of people, men and women, marched in Seattle, in Washington, DC, and in cities and towns in between. They carried signs, they chanted, and they made it absolutely undeniably clear that when it comes to women's rights and healthcare, people across the country do not want to go backward. Since then, they have continued to speak up and stand up. prgtoken But we are here today because and s in Congress simply are not getting the message. I want to discuss one crucial example in particular--the possibility that in a matter of days, Senate s could roll back a rule protecting family planning providers from being discriminated against and denied Federal funding. prgtoken Let me start by explaining a bit about what family planning providers mean to our community. These providers--part of the Title X program, which has bipartisan history--deliver critical healthcare services nationwide but are especially needed in rural and frontier areas. In 2015 alone, Title X provided basic primary and preventive healthcare services, such as Pap tests, breast exams, birth control, and HIV testing, to more than 4 million low-income women and men at nearly 4,000 health centers. In my home State of Washington, tens of thousands of patients are able to receive care at these centers each year. They often have nowhere else to turn for healthcare. In fact, 4 out of 10 woman who receive care at health centers funded by Title X consider it to be their only source of healthcare. prgtoken Taking resources away from these providers would be cruel. It would have the greatest impact on women and families who are most in need. But that is exactly what the law passed in the House, which is now on its way to the Senate, would mean. It would undo a valuable effort by the administration to ensure that healthcare providers are evaluated for Federal funding based on their ability to provide the services in question, not ideology. In doing so, the bill would make it even easier for States, led by extreme politicians, to deny family planning providers Federal funding, not because of the quality of the care they provide or the value to the communities they serve but based on whether the politicians in charge agree that women should be able to exercise their constitutionally protected rights to safe, legal abortion. prgtoken It is the 21st century. It is time for politicians to stop telling women what they can and can't do with their own bodies. That is what the women and men who have been marching and speaking up all over our country believe. That is what I believe. It is what believe. prgtoken If Leader McConnell thinks he can rush this harmful legi
OIRA INSIGHT, REFORM, AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
Stacey E. Plaskett (Democrat, VI) \u2014 2017-3-1

. Mr. Chair, this amendment would require agencies to report on their efforts to coordinate with State, local, and tribal governments throughout the regulatory process. I agree that it is important that State, local, and tribal governments are properly included in the regulatory process. The amendment, however, simply adds new requirements without addressing the flaws in the underlying bill. prgtoken The amendment fails to address the fact that this bill does not exclude independent agencies from its coverage. Congress designed independent agencies to be just that, independent. prgtoken The amendment fails to include an offset for the additional $20 million in administrative costs that this bill will likely cost Federal agencies. prgtoken The amendment also fails to insert a provision into the bill to ensure that OIRA reviews do not contradict existing laws. The amendment also fails to mandate a specific timeframe within which OIRA must complete its review. prgtoken The amendment simply does nothing to improve the numerous deficiencies in this bill. prgtoken , .
Russia (Executive Calendar)
Christopher A. Coons (Democrat, DE) \u2014 2017-3-1

. Well, briefly, if I could. Two bills that are currently gathering cosponsors--and which I hope our colleagues will review and consider joining us in cosponsoring--one is S. 341, the Russia Sanctions Review Act of 2017, which currently has 18 cosponsors. The other is S. 94, the Counteracting Russian Hostilities Act of 2017, that has 20 cosponsors--10 s and 10 . In both cases, we are proud to have a very broad range of both s and engaged in this important legislation, which ensures that Russia pays a price for breaking the rules. It starts by taking action to support the sanctions against the Russian Government for its occupation, its illegal annexation of Crimea, for its egregious human rights violations in Syria, and for meddling in the U.S. election. It prevents the lifting of sanctions on Russia until the Russian Government ceases the very activities that caused these sanctions to be put in place in the first place. It supports civil society, pro-democracy, anti-corruption activists in Russia and across Europe to show that many of us are determined, as members of the Foreign Relations Committee, as members of the Appropriations Committee, as Senators--not as partisans--that we intend to fund the tools that will enable the United States and our NATO allies to push back on Russia's aggression. Most of these tools come from the international affairs budget: State Department and foreign assistance accounts. prgtoken I want to commend you, Senator, for giving a strong and impassioned speech on the floor today about the importance of our keeping all of these tools in our toolkit so that as we confront our adversaries around the world, we have the resources and the ability to partner with and strengthen our allies as well. prgtoken We have no quarrel with the Russian people, but we are here because there is nothing Vladimir Putin's regime would love more than to see his actions divide us in this Chamber and divide us in this country from our vital allies in Europe and divide the whole North Atlantic community that for seven decades has brought peace and stability to prgtoken Europe, has brought prosperity to the United States, not as an act of charity but as an investment in the best interests of security. prgtoken We are here to say with one voice that we will stand up to Russian aggression that undermines democracy and violates human rights. prgtoken I am grateful for my colleague, for the chance to join him on the floor today, and I look forward to working together with any of our colleagues who see these issues as clearly as my friend and colleague, the Senator from Florida.
Family Planning Providers (Executive Calendar)
Richard Blumenthal (Democrat, CT) \u2014 2017-3-1

I am proud and honored to follow my very distinguished colleague from New Hampshire, Senator Shaheen, and Senator Murray of Washington in this cause which invokes a line that I think the President used last night in his address to us, pledging cooperation for causes where we can make a common cause. prgtoken Surely no cause is more important than healthcare, no goal is more important than preventive services for prgtoken women so we can all avoid the costs not only in dollars and cents but the cost of human suffering and foreclosed futures that will come when women are denied these kinds of basic services. prgtoken I met this morning with a group from Planned Parenthood, patients and providers working in clinics across New England. They told me their story--some of them patients, some of them service providers and volunteers--about the kind of transformative effect that primary care, examinations and screenings, can have for women who would otherwise lack those services. The community health centers cannot substitute for them. prgtoken Family planning programs under title X are often the only Federal programs dedicated to providing comprehensive services in family planning but also in related preventive health services. prgtoken Over the past year alone, title X providers have provided cancer and HIV screenings, contraceptive services, and other primary and preventive services to over 4 million women and men at nearly 4,000 health centers in New England and across the country. This network of healthcare providers is a safety net. They compose a network, the title X network, including providers of State and local health departments, federally qualified health centers, and family planning councils. They create a network that provides a critical source of healthcare to people who otherwise would be denied it. They are trusted providers who are willing to serve the uninsured, the uninsured and low-income individuals who risk losing all access to healthcare if it was not for this network. prgtoken These clinics are often the only healthcare providers in rural areas and other parts of the country. So the political attacks on providers that provide abortion services would mean a loss of access to all family planning and preventive healthcare in these parts of the country--rural, metropolitan, suburban. Not only are these services necessary, but family planning services are really good investments, especially when it comes to the money that otherwise would be spent when illnesses or diseases become more serious. prgtoken In 2010, the $1.14 billion that was spent in this country on family planning resulted in more than $8 billion in gross savings. That is a clearly worthwhile investment. prgtoken The resolution that passed the House last month that Senator McConnell is considering bringing to the Senate floor would eliminate protections that prevent discrimination against these very providers, discriminati
CONGRESSIONAL PROGRESSIVE CAUCUS: REACTIONS TO THE PRESIDENT'S ADDRESS TO CONGRESS
Jamie Raskin (Democrat, MD) \u2014 2017-3-1

I thank Congresswoman Jayapal. She has been a sensational leader within the ic Caucus and within the Congressional Progressive Caucus, especially on the issues of immigration and the rights of refugees. It is such an honor to be able to serve with her. I appreciate being able to spend some moments just reflecting on what took place in our Chamber last night with the President's speech. prgtoken We should start by giving credit where credit is due. This speech was not ``American Carnage II.'' It was a vast improvement, I would say, over all of the violent and apocalyptic imagery and rhetoric that we saw in the inaugural address. So hats off to the President's new speech writer, whoever that may be. prgtoken However, having said that, I think it is simply old wine in a new bottle. The same basic extremist Steve Bannon infrastructure governed that address despite the fact that the manners had improved considerably. prgtoken When I thought about President 's speech in this Chamber last night, I thought about George Orwell. Not because of 1984, although I admit that my well-thumbed copy of this great dystopian novel is sitting on my desk right now and the words ``war is peace'' and ``ignorance is strength'' have been running through my mind over the last several weeks. No, I thought of Orwell not because of 1984, but because of a great essay he once wrote called ``Notes on Nationalism.'' prgtoken In this essay, George Orwell contrasted patriotism and nationalism-- two concepts that often get conflated. But at least, in his view, they represented two very different things. Patriotism, he argued, was a positive emotion, a passionate belief in one's own community--its people, its institutions, its values, its history, its culture. prgtoken An American patriot today, I would argue, believes in our magnificent constitutional democracy--our Constitution; our Bill of Rights; our judiciary and our judges; our States and our communities; our poets like Emily Dickinson and Walt Whitman and Langston Hughes and Merrill Leffler; our philosophers like John Dewey and Ralph Waldo Emerson; our extraordinary dynamic culture which invites and absorbs new waves of people from all over the world, our artists, our musicians like Bruce Springsteen, the Neville Brothers, and Dar Williams. All of these people and things are what we love about America, and they evoke the positive emotion of patriotism. prgtoken Patriotism is all about uplifting people; drawing on what is best in our history; finding what is best in our culture; invoking our Founders, Madison, prgtoken Jefferson, Franklin, and Tom Paine; invoking the people who founded the country once again through the Civil War and the reconstruction amendments, Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass; the people who transformed America in the women's suffrage movement, like Susan B. Anthony; the people who remade America once again in the civil rights movement, like Martin
WOMEN'S HISTORY MONTH 2017
Peter J. Visclosky (Democrat, IN) \u2014 2017-3-1

it is with great respect and admiration that I rise today in observance of Women's History Month and its 2017 theme: Honoring Trailblazing Women in Labor and Business. Each year, the National Women's History Project selects a unifying theme to recognize and promote Women's History Month. This year's theme features the stories of women from diverse backgrounds and different fields who have challenged and changed the paid labor force to secure equal rights and equal opportunities for women in the workplace. Despite facing barriers in the workplace, women have always worked and, at times in America's history, have provided the majority of the volunteer labor force. Women of every race, class, and ethnic background are woven into the history of our nation's labor force and continue to significantly impact social and legal structure in the workplace. Longstanding constraints, including religious and educational conventions, often meant women experienced limited opportunities, low wages, and poor working conditions while performing low-skill, short- term labor positions in the American workforce. Strong role models such as Kate Mullany and Lucy Gonzalez-Parsons were pioneers in the organized labor field in the late 19th century through the turn of 20th century. These women forged the way for other women in all professions, trades, and the arts and sciences to organize for better working conditions and fair wages. Because of these courageous trailblazers, women today, such as Yvonne Walker, the first African-American woman to serve as President of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), and Lily Ledbetter, whose landmark Supreme Court case of employee discrimination brought about legislative changes and the eponymous Fair Pay Act of 2009, women today are empowered to serve as activists in the fight for fairness in the workplace. These remarkable women were leaders and organizers who not only secured their own rights and access to equal opportunity but also served as a voice for many women who were undervalued and underpaid. Women today continue to carry the torch to secure workplace justice and equality and to contest and challenge norms in the American workforce. These female entrepreneurs, labor leaders, and innovators have challenged stereotypes and social assumptions about who women are and what they can achieve. These strong women, past and present, serve as remarkable role models who reflect the 2017 theme, Honoring Trailblazing Women in Labor and Business I am honored to join in celebrating Women's History Month and to recognize that after decades of dedication, perseverance, contributions, and advances, the stories of American women from all cultures and classes are being printed, spoken, recognized, and celebrated. In an effort to illustrate the many courageous and dedicated women throughout America's history, we remember and recount the tales of our ancestors' talents, s