mesut/congress_speeches huggingface dataset:
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET, FISCAL YEAR 2017--Continued
Sherrod Brown (Democrat, OH) \u2014 2017-1-4

70 years ago United Mine Workers president John L. Lewis, a lifelong , sat down with the ic Secretary of the Interior, Julius Krug. They struck a deal to end a national strike. They promised health and pension benefits for miners in exchange for a lifetime of hard work. It is a promise that the Federal Government has kept ever since. prgtoken For 70 years, no matter the President, no matter the party in control of the Senate, we have kept that promise. That changed, unfortunately, in December. This body left for vacation. It left tens of thousands of mine workers to face an uncertain future, not knowing if the pensions and health care they had earned for themselves--and in many cases for their widows--over a lifetime of hard work would be there for them in the future. This is shameful. prgtoken Senator Portman, my colleague from Ohio, and I and Senator Manchin and Senator Capito, a and a from West Virginia, and Senator Casey--a number of us--said: We should not leave Washington to go home to our families until we take care of mine worker families. prgtoken Congress has the power to stop these cuts and to live up to this pledge. We had a bipartisan solution that would have passed if it had been brought to the floor. But instead, Congress broke its promise to these miners and their families. Congress stole the health care they had earned by passing a continuing resolution that failed to address the pension problem, and it stole the funds that were still left in their health care plan to pay for a 4-month fix--4 months, 4 months. Who can make health care decisions when you don't know if you will have health care coverage 4 months from now? prgtoken These working people don't deserve to live with this kind of uncertainty. I have heard my colleagues, particularly on the side of the aisle, always talk about predictability. Government should never inject more uncertainty into the lives of individuals, never should inject uncertainty into the lives of business people as they make investment decisions. prgtoken But that is what we have done with these mine workers. We have made their lives less certain, less predictable, and their health care so unpredictable. This is the health care these workers fought for, the health care they sacrificed raises for. Keep in mind that at the bargaining table, workers will be willing to accept less wages today in exchange for health care and pensions in the future. That is what collective bargaining is often about. That is what is so important. prgtoken This is health care they sacrificed raises for. It was the health care we promised them. My colleagues know their stories of hard work and sacrifice. We know these stories because over the past year, these miners traveled here by the busload. They rode long distances. They gathered in the heat and in the cold for hours outside this building to make their voic
HONORING STEVEN KINSEY
Jared Huffman (Democrat, CA) \u2014 2017-1-4

I rise today in recognition of Steven (Steve) Kinsey as he retires from the Marin County Board of Supervisors after serving the people residing in the Fourth District, and Marin County, with exceptional distinction for nearly 20 years. Throughout his tenure, Supervisor Kinsey has been steadfast and passionate in his pursuit of social equity, protection of the agricultural landscape and historic ranching community in West Marin, and improved transportation infrastructure and services, among many other noble causes. Most importantly, he has been productive through the decades, accomplishing many victories for the people and places of Marin. prgtoken Born in Wilmington, Delaware in 1952, Supervisor Kinsey earned his B.A. in Architecture from Arizona State University. He moved to Forest Knolls in 1978 where he raised a family, owned and operated his own design/build business for 18 years, and volunteered in the community. As a member of the Marin Conservation League Board of Directors, he was recognized for promoting water conservation strategies and advocating for a Bayland Corridor to increase protections for bayside wetlands. A stalwart public school advocate, he secured for the Lagunitas School District funds for facilities improvements and school-based health and support services for its students and families. prgtoken Elected to the Board of Supervisors in 1996, Supervisor Kinsey took office on January 7, 1997, and served for five terms, representing all of the coastal areas of Marin County as well as several bay side communities. As an elected official, including five times as Board President, he focused on watershed and fishery restoration, sustainable agriculture, the integration of transportation and land use planning, and sound fiscal management. He championed the needs of children and families, and has worked closely with communities of color to reduce the barriers to equal opportunity. prgtoken He served on the boards of numerous organizations including the Board of the Marin Agricultural Land Trust, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Marin Transit, and the Transportation Authority of Marin, which he chaired from 1998 to 2011. He joined the California Coastal Commission in 2011, was its chairman three times, and served on the board of the California State Coastal Conservancy. prgtoken Under his leadership, Marin has become a national leader in biking and walking, including Safe Routes to School, and established the Bay Area Ridge Trail. During thirteen years as Chair of Marin's Transportation Authority and Congestion Management Agency, Supervisor Kinsey led Marin's efforts to improve mobility along the 101 corridor and throughout his district. Drawing on his consensus-building skills, he secured community support and funding for voter-highway improvements in the Twin Cities area, and extending the Sonoma Marin Area Rapid Transit (SMART) train to the ferry. prgtoken It has been my honor a
CHANGING SENATE RULES
Tom Udall (Democrat, NM) \u2014 2017-1-4

today I wish to continue what has become a tradition. At the beginning of the 112th Congress, I took to the Senate floor and called for this body to adopt its rules with a simple majority vote and to amend them so they actually allowed the body to function as our Founders intended. prgtoken I did the same at the beginning of the 112th, 113th, and 114th Congresses. Today, at the start of the 115th Congress, I again call for reform. This is something I have done as a member of the majority and the minority. Senator Merkley has worked closely with me on this issue and spoke briefly yesterday about our efforts. prgtoken But we did not start this tradition. It dates back decades. My predecessor, Clinton Anderson, was a leading proponent of what has become known as the ``constitutional option'' in the 1950s and 1960s. Vice President Walter Mondale--then a Senator from Minnesota--carried on the tradition in the 1970s. When Senator Merkley and I first joined the Senate, Senator Tom Harkin worked closely with us to help us carry on the tradition. prgtoken The proposals we have offered to change the rules at the start of a new Congress have never been radical. They were changes we were willing to live with whether we were in the majority or minority. We have offered the same proposals as Members of the majority and minority. We believe the Senate is broken, and even the minority party should want to fix it. prgtoken Congress had made some progress in recent years, but unfortunately, it took unprecedented obstruction to bring it about. s blocked nominees to all sorts of positions submitted by President , so we took action to change the rules to break through the gridlock. It was unfortunate that s precipitated that situation, but the result was for the best. prgtoken New rules allow for a lower cloture threshold for all nominees except those to the Supreme Court now, and the new President can take advantage of them, just as President was able to do for the final years of his term. prgtoken But no one would argue that Congress or the nomination process has been fixed. Further debate and reform is needed on many aspects of Senate function. prgtoken We believe the Senate should openly debate and consider its rules at the start of each Congress, to consider changes that can provide commonsense reforms. This ongoing process is the ideal way to restore the best traditions of the Senate and allow it to conduct the business that the American people expect. prgtoken We have one goal whether we are in the majority or in the minority: to give the American people the government they expect and deserve--a government that works. prgtoken This is not just about rules. It is about the norms and traditions of the Senate. prgtoken Neither side is 100 percent pure. Both sides have used the rules for obstruction. No doubt they had their reasons. prgtoken But I don't think the Ame
MIDNIGHT RULES RELIEF ACT OF 2017
Steve Cohen (Democrat, TN) \u2014 2017-1-4

I thank the ranking member and chairman in the past, my chairman. prgtoken This bill has come up over many years when I served on this subcommittee and was the ranking member and the chair at one time. Mr. Issa suggested it might only be six or seven regulations. If that was the case, they could take them individually. prgtoken There is a process where regulations can be brought before the House, in the Congressional Review Act, and each one studied individually, and the House could overrule them. I can't fathom that they are bringing this bill for just six regulations which they could do individually. But even then, that is wrong to put them all together. We know what is going to happen is they are going to pass. They are going to pass the House. Whether they pass the Senate is another issue. prgtoken These are not midnight regulations. These are regulations that go back to last June. So the term ``midnight regulations'' is a misnomer. To say that these are just decisions made by bureaucrats, you would think bureaucrats were something out of a medical dictionary that was highly contagious. Bureaucrats could also be called experts, specialists, dedicated government officials. prgtoken There are people who study these issues that, to be implemented, need to be fine-tuned to fit into society, sometimes to protect consumers, sometimes to protect commerce, and it takes years and years and years, often, for these regulations to take effect. Some of them protect animals--the soring industry. prgtoken A great majority of this House was in favor of a bill to protect walking horses, but it didn't get a vote because there were some people in this House that were against it and against it so much that they worked to get one of the finest Members I have served with, Ed Whitfield, out of this House. That was despicable. I suspect that same power that might have had that effect could bring that type of regulation up to be nullified. I would fear that, and I would find it wrong in the spirit of Ed Whitfield and fairness.
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION ON THE BUDGET, FISCAL YEAR 2017--Continued
Debbie Stabenow (Democrat, MI) \u2014 2017-1-4

first let me comment on what my friend, the distinguished Senator from Texas, said. If my car goes into a ditch, the first thing I don't do is dismantle the car. That doesn't help me get anywhere in terms of transportation. prgtoken First of all, let me speak on process before talking about the substance of what we are really talking about and how it affects people. We have a bill in front of us that creates a process for the majority to be able to unravel and repeal essentially our whole health care system. You pull a thread and it goes through not only employer- based care, patient protections, people who have insurance, Medicare, Medicaid. All of it begins to unravel. Interestingly, also in this bill, in the text it adds $1 trillion to the deficit--$1 trillion to the deficit in the bill that our colleagues just voted to proceed to pass. prgtoken We need to be very clear on this: If colleagues want to work with us to fix problems and improve health care, we can start this afternoon. It is almost 3:30. By 4 o'clock we could put together a group of people. I am sure our distinguished ic leader on the Budget Committee would be happy to sit down and work together on ways to make health care reform better and make health care more affordable and make it more available to people. If that is what we want to do, count us in, but that is not what we are talking about here. We are talking about this crazy idea that no one in their real life would do. prgtoken It is like deciding you want a new house, so you tear down the old house. That is the easy part. Then your family is homeless. Then you say: Well, gosh, you know, maybe I better have a plan to get a new house for my family and figure out a way to pay for it, to be able to afford it. prgtoken Nobody would do that. Nobody would start by saying: We are going to rip apart the entire health care system and create chaos. We are going to undermine Medicare. We are going to undermine Medicaid. We are going to take away patient protections for everybody who has insurance through their employer, and then we will figure out later what we are going to do to replace it, if anything. prgtoken I know there is a division on the side. Certainly Members in the House don't think it should even be replaced at all. prgtoken It is interesting. We are talking about one-sixth of the economy that would be destabilized. There is no question that if you do a repeal and insurance companies don't know what is coming--I have talked to hospitals, and they don't know what is coming--behavior will begin to change. Rates will begin to go up. Different decisions will be made because, as businesses, they will not know how to plan. Their investors will not know how to plan. prgtoken There is no question about it. When you repeal without creating certainty in the marketplace, you begin a process that results in chaos. prgtoken We have an interesting example, one that I
FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ACT AMENDMENTS OF 2017
Wm. Lacy Clay (Democrat, MO) \u2014 2017-1-4

such time as I may consume. prgtoken Let me begin by thanking the chairman for his understanding and his support of this legislation. I certainly appreciate it, and I am sure it will make the Federal Government run more efficiently. prgtoken I rise in strong support of the Federal Advisory Committee Act Amendments. I have introduced this bill in previous Congresses, and it passed the House last year without opposition. prgtoken The FACA was originally enacted in 1972. It is intended to ensure that committees that provide advice to Federal agencies and the President operate with transparency. prgtoken Advisory committees provide the government with recommendations on a wide range of issues. For example, the EPA relies on the expertise of the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee to provide technical advice on setting national air quality standards. prgtoken The bill we are considering today would strengthen FACA to make Federal advisory committees more transparent and to make agencies more accountable in how they select and use these committees. Agencies currently can avoid the requirements of FACA by conducting advisory committee business through subcommittees. This bill makes it clear that FACA applies to subcommittees as well as parent committees. prgtoken The bill also clarifies that a committee set up by a contractor is subject to FACA if it is formed under direction of the President or an agency. prgtoken Under FACA, agencies would be required to disclose how advisory members are chosen, whether they have financial conflicts of interest if they are appointed to provide their own expertise, and who they work for if they are representing a specific interest. prgtoken I urge my colleagues to support this bill. I hope the Senate will take it up quickly and send it to the President. prgtoken .
APPROVING LOCATION OF MEMORIAL TO COMMEMORATE MEMBERS OF ARMED FORCES WHO SERVED IN SUPPORT OF OPERATION DESERT STORM OR OPERATION DESERT SHIELD
Niki Tsongas (Democrat, MA) \u2014 2017-1-4

such time as I may consume. prgtoken , following the invasion and occupation of Kuwait by Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, the United States and the international community demanded the immediate withdrawal of Iraqi forces under the threat of military action. After Saddam Hussein defied calls to withdraw from Kuwait, the United States, along with a broad coalition of European, regional, and global allies, began Operation Desert Shield, followed by Operation Desert Storm, a 100-hour land war which expelled the Iraqi forces from Kuwait. prgtoken Approximately 700,000 members of the American Armed Forces served as part of Operation Desert Storm and Operation Desert Shield. Of those, 293 died in theater and 148 were killed in action. prgtoken The 2015 National Defense Authorization Act authorized the National Desert Storm and Desert Shield War Memorial Association to establish a memorial as a commemorative work on Federal land in the District of Columbia. This honors the members of the American Armed Forces who served and those who made the ultimate sacrifice in support of our country. prgtoken The joint resolution before us today approves the general location of the memorial so that it is in close proximity to the National Mall and other nationally significant war memorials, as determined by the Secretary of the Interior. prgtoken This resolution is an opportunity for the country to come together and thank the servicemembers who fought in the Gulf, those whose lives have been forever changed by their experience in this war, and those who did not return. prgtoken I support this resolution, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes.'' prgtoken , .
SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 4--CLARIFYING ANY POTENTIAL MISUNDERSTANDING AS TO WHETHER ACTIONS TAKEN BY PRESIDENT-ELECT DONALD TRUMP CONSTITUTE A VIOLATION OF THE EMOLUMENTS CLAUSE, AND CALLING ON...
Benjamin L. Cardin (Democrat, MD) \u2014 2017-1-4

it is with a renewed sense of purpose that I reintroduce my resolution on the Emoluments Clause. It is a resolution intended to uphold the values and strictures of one of our most sacred documents. I am referring, of course, to the Constitution, the instrument that, in but a short time, President-elect will take an oath to preserve, protect, and defend. prgtoken Our Founding Fathers could not have been clearer that any Federal office holder of the United States must never be put in a position where he or she could be influenced by a foreign governmental actor. It was a concern made explicit by Alexander Hamilton's writings in Federalist No. 22, in which he noted examples of republics that had been ruthlessly dismembered by their hostile neighbors who had paralyzed the victim republic by bribing its officers and officials. prgtoken The Founding Fathers addressed this grave concern by placing the Emoluments Clause within the Constitution as an explicit bar on foreign corruption and interference. Article I, section 9, clause 8 of the United States Constitution declares that: No title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State. prgtoken Longstanding precedent has made it plain that the President of the United States, as the head of the executive branch of the government, clearly occupies an ``office of profit or trust''. As such, the Emoluments Clause clearly applies to and constrains whomever holds the office of the Presidency. prgtoken Past American presidents have recognized the danger of foreign corruption and interference, or merely the perception of corruption and interference, and have accordingly taken great pains to avoid even the appearance of impropriety with regard to their personal wealth and investments, ensuring that such investments never interfere with performing their duties as President of the United States. Presidents Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George Herbert Walker , Bill Clinton, and all had their assets placed into blind trust while they were President. To fulfill his promises of greater government transparency, President went even further and invested the vast majority of his funds in U.S. Treasury bonds. prgtoken The President-elect has claimed he will ``absolutely sever'' his ties to the Organization, which has financial interests around the world and negotiates and concludes transactions with foreign states, as well as entities that are extensions of foreign states. We have a constitutional duty to ensure that he does. It is easy to imagine circumstances in which a foreign government will want to give President a personal gift through his businesses with the intent t
REGULATIONS FROM THE EXECUTIVE IN NEED OF SCRUTINY ACT OF 2017
Thomas A. Garrett, Jr. (Republican, VA) \u2014 2017-1-5

I rise today in support of the REINS Act, H.R. 26, for any number of reasons. prgtoken I can't help but point out that I have heard my esteemed colleagues in opposition to this bill refer on multiple occasions to the Federal bureaucracy as a well-oiled machine there are, indeed, well-oiled machines that undergird this institution, but I would submit the Federal bureaucracy is not one of those. prgtoken We have heard that the regulatory burden, as it relates to the loss of jobs, is equal to a listeria outbreak. What I would submit is that if we could avoid a listeria outbreak, would we not choose to do just that? prgtoken While looking at the loss of jobs as related to Federal regulation, we overstep the argument by avoiding the jobs not created as a result of Federal regulations. Should these things also not be amongst the items that we consider? prgtoken A wise man once said that the bureaucracy will continue to expand to meet the expanding needs of the bureaucracy. In 2017, in the United States, indeed, it seems we find ourselves in that very situation. prgtoken Arguments that the REINS Act is contrary to the Constitution, I would submit, are actually 180 degrees from the truth. In fact, Article I of the Constitution gives the power to make law to this legislative branch of our government and gives the power to generate revenue, here, as well as spend. prgtoken The definition of ``law,'' according to the Oxford Dictionary, is: ``The system of rules which a particular country or community recognizes as regulating the actions of its members and which it may enforce by the imposition of penalties.'' prgtoken I will submit that the very regulatory overreach that we consider here today is, in fact, tantamount to law and extraconstitutional in and of itself. prgtoken My esteemed colleague from Pennsylvania suggested, and I agree, that the REINS Act is but a good start. The power to spend is Article I. The power to make laws is Article I. prgtoken REINS is a rudder on the ship of constitutionality that will right that ship and move it only in the correct direction. Regulations that have the power to take liberty or property rights or the wealth of those earned by their own labor are tantamount to law and, indeed, extraordinary constitutionally as it relates to an executive branch entity, and they should not be exercised. prgtoken , we hear that the people's House is responsible for this and the people's House is responsible for that. Well, the people's House is to ensure that the people have a voice in the matters of spending and lawmaking that our Founders who laid out Article I of the Constitution envisioned, and currently, that is simply not the case. H.R. 26 is simply a step back towards that right direction of constitutionality. prgtoken With that in mind, I strongly support the legislation.