mesut/congress_speeches huggingface dataset:
PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL OF A RULE SUBMITTED BY THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Jeff Merkley (Democrat, OR) \u2014 2017-2-2

I appreciate my colleague from Hawaii, both on the substance of the issue and on the Congressional Review Act and how it is an unsuitable tool in a situation like this because of how it bars the door for a simple way to replace or modify a regulation. prgtoken I am coming to the floor tonight to share my concerns about a basic challenge we have in the world. This basic challenge is that when you get a ruler of a country who is corrupt, they forge contractual relationships, particularly if they are rich in minerals or oil, and they pocket the money and they spread the corruption. It makes it virtually impossible for the interests of the people of that country to be represented by their government because whatever governing body they have keeps making decisions based on those corrupt payments. prgtoken Now, we are a nation that values government by the people--of, by, and for the people. That is the vision of our Nation, but that vision would not be fulfilled if the Members of this body were being paid by foreign companies to serve the interests of the foreign companies instead of the interests of the people. We can understand from our own perspective our own desire to have a government that serves our citizens and that other nations want to have a government that serves their citizens. That is what this particular bill and the regulation that flows from it were all about. It was section 504 of Dodd-Frank, the resource extraction rule, that was passed now 7 years ago. prgtoken It took quite a while to get the regulation into place. The first version came out in 2012, after a tremendous amount of consultation was struck down in court because it was challenged by one of the companies that did not want to have transparency in international payments. Then folks went to work again and produced a rule that went into effect this last year. Unfortunately, we are about to strike that down. prgtoken I was thinking about how one of the champions for this was Senator Dick Lugar of Indiana. I was so impressed by his thoughtfulness when I came to the Senate. He had been here quite a while, and he worked to really understand issues, and he worked to solve problems. He didn't work to obstruct an administration because it was of a different party. He didn't work to sabotage the work of this body because one party or the other was in the majority. He worked to solve problems. He had really a deep understanding of the challenges in the world. prgtoken He could see this from his considerable experience. He was on foreign relations for a very long time, and he served as its chair. He knew from his own work in that committee, from his own studies, from his own travels, and his own conversations--overseas conversations with foreign governments and conversations with our State Department and our Defense Department--that we had a significant issue in which contracts with large companies are used to defeat government of,
NOMINATIONS OF BETSY DeVOS AND ANDREW PUZDER
Charles E. Schumer (Democrat, NY) \u2014 2017-2-2

. Now, on another matter, the pending nominations of the President's Cabinet, again, we are in prgtoken unchartered waters with this administration. They have not proposed a normal Cabinet. This is not even close to a normal Cabinet. prgtoken I have never seen a Cabinet this full of bankers and billionaires, folks with massive conflicts of interest and such little experience or expertise in the areas they will oversee. Many of the nominees have philosophies that cut against the very nature of the Department to which they were nominated. prgtoken Let me give you two examples this morning: Betsy DeVos, the nominee for the Department of Education, and Andrew Puzder, nominee for the Labor Department. prgtoken First, Betsy DeVos. When you judge her in three areas--conflicts of interest, basic competence, and ideology, views on education policy--it is clear that Betsy DeVos is unfit for the job of Education Secretary. prgtoken In all three areas, ideology, competence, and conflicts of interest, she rates among the lowest of any Cabinet nominee I have ever seen. At her hearing, she didn't seem to know basic facts about Federal education law that guarantee education to students with disabilities. She didn't seem to know the basic facts of a long simmering debate in education policy measuring growth proficiency. And in her ethics agreement, which was delivered to the committee after her first hearing, it was revealed that she would keep interests in several companies that benefit from millions of dollars in contracts from the Department of Education, which she would oversee. prgtoken There was a rush to push her through--one round of questions, 5 minutes each. Why? Why did someone generally as fair as the chairman of that committee do that? My guess, an educated guess: He knew how incompetent this nominee was, how poorly she fared under normal questions, and the idea was to rush her through. prgtoken Well, that is not what we should be doing on something as important as this. And if the nominee can't withstand a certain amount of scrutiny, they shouldn't be the nominee. prgtoken The glaring concerns have led two of my colleagues, the Senators from Maine and Alaska, to pledge a vote against her confirmation, leaving her nomination deadlocked at 50 to 50. I believe both of them cited the fact that in their State, charter schools are not the big issue; it is public schools. How are we going to treat public schools? Particularly in rural areas, as I am sure my friend the Presiding Officer knows, there is not a choice of schools outside the major metropolitan areas, the major cities. If you don't have a good public school, you have nothing. So particularly people from the rural States should be worried, in my judgment, about our nominee's commitment to public education. prgtoken For the first time ever, we have the chance that the Vice President and a pending Cabinet nominee, the nominee for Attorney General, Senator S
DISAPPROVING A RULE SUBMITTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Maria Cantwell (Democrat, WA) \u2014 2017-2-2

I see my colleague from Texas. Did he want to make remarks in leader time? prgtoken , I come to the floor to talk about the action today in the Senate, which is to try to overrun the clean water rule as it relates to the mining industry. prgtoken The bottom line is, polluters should pay for the pollution, and that is what the rule says, and that is what is trying to be overrun today after a very short debate in the Senate. prgtoken Some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle would like to say it is about the coal industry and a war on coal. If they are so concerned about the coal industry, I would suggest to them prgtoken and coal workers that they take up the pension bill they promised to take up in the last Congress and have failed to take up. prgtoken Last December, thousands of coal miners came to Washington, DC, and asked the Senate to live up to their promise that was made and put their health on the line and make sure that they had a pension program. More than 20,000 retired coal miners are at risk of losing their health care if we do nothing by April, and they have a very small pension-- averaging about $530 a month--that is also at risk. prgtoken I know some of my colleagues would like to believe this is somehow entirely related to a war on coal, but that narrative ignores the facts. In 2008, right before the financial crisis, the United Mine Workers' pension plan was 93 percent funded--in 2008, 93 percent funded. Its actuaries projected it was on track to reach full funding in several years. prgtoken So this notion that somehow the discussion behind the scenes by the Interior Department or the EPA caused an implosion in the mining industry and thereby they didn't have resources is not the case. What is the case is that the financial crisis hit, and Wall Street speculators blew up our economy, costing it $14 trillion--according to the Dallas Fed--and many in this body bailed them out. But we did nothing to bail out the miner pension program. Those pensions were thrown into crisis. By 2009, the United Mine Workers' plan had dropped from the 93-percent funded level down to the low seventies--a 20- percent drop in a single year. So despite the fact that the plan was well managed, the investment returns continued to be problematic. Wall Street--not the Department of the Interior or EPA--is the reason mine workers have so much challenge today. prgtoken If they care so much about the mining industry and the workers, then bring that legislation forward on the floor of the Senate today instead of trying to overturn a rule that says polluters should pay. prgtoken These safe drinking water issues and fishing issues are so important to an outdoor economy that employs a million-plus workers and is a vital part of practically every State's economy. The notion that somehow this is a jobs issue--if they want to protect jobs in the outdoor industry, then please allow people to fish i
DISAPPROVING A RULE SUBMITTED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Chris Van Hollen (Democrat, MD) \u2014 2017-2-2

with the resolution on the floor today, our colleagues are beginning their effort to roll back critical prgtoken health, safety, and environmental safeguards that the administration put in place. prgtoken The tool that they are using, the Congressional Review Act, is a particularly blunt instrument. The Congressional Review Act allows the majority to rush a resolution of disapproval through the Senate with limited debate and only a limited opportunity for Americans to see what Congress is doing. prgtoken But a resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act does not just send a rule back to the drawing board. Instead, the resolution repeals the rule and prohibits the Agency from ever proposing anything like it again. An analysis in the Washington Law Review reported that it is ``conceivable that any subsequent attempt to regulate in any way whatsoever in the same broad topical area would be barred.'' prgtoken The rule before us today, the stream protection rule, deals with how waste from surface mining, also called ``mountaintop mining,'' is handled. The rule prevents this waste from being dumped near streams. The waste from these mining operations includes toxic pollutants like lead and arsenic. And these pollutants can cause serious health problems in surrounding communities. A 2008 study in the Journal of the North American Benthological Society found that 98 percent of streams downstream from mountaintop mining operations were damaged. This rule limits pollution near streams, requires monitoring of water quality, and creates standards to restore streams after a mining operation ends. prgtoken The Reagan administration first put forward stream protections in 1983, exercising authority under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977. Today more than 30 years later, we better understand the effects of surface mining, and it makes sense to update our standards to protect public health. The administration revisited the issue in 2008, but a Federal court vacated the administration rule because they failed to fully consider effects on wildlife. prgtoken Under the administration, in 2009, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, or OSMRE, began considering options to bring these stream protections up to date with the current scientific understanding. In the course of developing the updated rule, OSMRE shared information and solicited comment from State regulatory authorities and incorporated their feedback. The Office of Management and Budget's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs continued the stakeholder engagement process. The administration considered the issue deliberately, for 7 years, before publishing the final rule in December. prgtoken OSMRE acted appropriately with the Stream Protection Rule. But the question before us today is not whether the rule is perfect. Today we are considering whether the Ag
PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL OF A RULE SUBMITTED BY THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
Brian Higgins (Democrat, NY) \u2014 2017-2-2

I rise in opposition to H.J. Res. 40 with a message, and that is: Do not repeal this rule. prgtoken The Social Security Administration rule is intended to promote and to preserve the integrity of gun ownership in America. prgtoken I have heard it said by gun owner advocates that a steady hand is the best gun control. I believe that, but a steady hand requires a rationale mind. prgtoken The Social Security Administration rule that my colleagues on the other side want to eliminate is written carefully and narrowly, affecting a very small group of people with a very severe, long-term mental disorder that makes them unable to do any kind of work in the U.S. economy, even part-time or with very low wages and, also, people not mentally capable of managing their own benefits. prgtoken The Social Security Administration rule ensures that individuals, who are already prohibited from having guns under existing Federal law, have their names included on the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. prgtoken , 93 percent of Americans support background checks and believe that systems should be in place to ensure that guns are not in the hands of individuals who have been determined already by Federal law to be unable to use them safely. prgtoken I urge my colleagues to reject H.J. Res. 40.
PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL OF A RULE SUBMITTED BY THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Tom Udall (Democrat, NM) \u2014 2017-2-2

President made bold claims about his intention to ``drain the swamp.'' But here we are, debating a measure that would do the exact opposite. The Senate is actually voting to kill an anticorruption regulation. prgtoken This regulation was the result of bipartisan effort led by Senator Dick Lugar. Senator Lugar was my mentor when I first joined the Senate. He helped me better understand the role and traditions of this body; and he showed me what it meant to be a statesmen. prgtoken Senator Lugar was one of the most thoughtful foreign policy experts to serve in the Senate. He chaired the Foreign Relations Committee, and he was deeply respected on both sides of the aisle. prgtoken He understood the ``resource curse.'' How developing countries with billions of dollars in oil, gas, or other valuable minerals often had the worst poverty, how the governments of these countries made deals with huge corporations to sell their resources, but the citizens of those countries never saw the benefits. Instead, corrupt leaders would enrich themselves, rather than use the funds to pay for healthcare, education, infrastructure, or housing. prgtoken Senator Lugar, with Senator Cardin, developed legislation to address the resource curse, to bring transparency to an opaque system. The result was section 1504 of the Dodd-Frank Act. It directed the SEC to issue a rule requiring all oil, gas, and mineral companies listed on U.S. stock exchanges to disclose the payments they make to foreign governments. prgtoken This allows the citizens of those countries to hold their leaders accountable. It shines a light on corruption. And when citizens can demand that this money is used for their benefit, it reduces their need for foreign aid. prgtoken Opponents of this rule claimed it would put American companies at a disadvantage. In fact, it made the U.S. a leader. Other countries followed suit and passed similar requirements. prgtoken The Cardin-Lugar rule became the global standard for transparency. Today, 80 percent of the world's largest publicly listed oil, gas and mining companies--including state-owned companies from Russia, China, and Brazil--are subject to disclosure rules. prgtoken This resolution of disapproval is just one of many misguided efforts by s to use the Congressional Review Act to kill regulations that protect the most vulnerable. prgtoken The CRA was enacted in 1996 as part of the radical deregulatory and anticonsumer actions by shepherded by Newt Gingrich. Before now, the CRA has successfully been used to overturn only one rule. prgtoken There is a reason it has only been successfully used once. The CRA is a blunt weapon. It is a poorly written law that comes with unintended consequences. The CRA allows Congress to strike down a rule in its entirety with only an hour of floor debate in the House and without the ability to filibuster it in the Senate. prgtoken This flawed process can undo years of ca
THE AMERICAN PHILOSOPHY
Janice D. Schakowsky (Democrat, IL) \u2014 2017-2-2

refugees that are fleeing for their lives are not the enemy. Look at this 3-year-old Syrian boy, Aylan Kurdi, who washed up on a beach in Turkey. He and his older brother and his mother drowned. They were among, literally, thousands of people who drowned escaping the violence that was certain in their home country of Syria. prgtoken Now the President is trying to keep them out of our country. He is condemning more children like Aylan to their death with this executive order. And in face of this immoral action by the administration, I have witnessed the decency and generosity of people in my district. I was proud to join people of all faiths in rallies to support our refugees and our Muslim neighbors. prgtoken I was with lawyers who rushed to O'Hare Airport to offer assistance to those who suddenly are detained under the executive order. prgtoken I have received hundreds of letters. One was from a couple who had joined with 13 friends to welcome and provide assistance to a family that wanted to resettle from Syria. They had collected money. They had collected furniture. They had worked for over a year in order to make this happen, and they finally got word that they were actually going to get a family to come. prgtoken Then, on January 30, they got official word that the family would not be allowed to enter. And now they don't know what happened to that family. prgtoken Let me just read the end of that letter. He said: Now we don't know what happened to the family. Because they are Syrian, they are indefinitely banned from the United States. Meanwhile, we have a warm apartment and $12,000 waiting for them. We have rooms full of furniture stockpiled, and no way to get to them. As a group of Chicagoans, as a second-generation American myself, we came together to aid a family in dire need and to affirm the quintessential American values of openness and inclusiveness. I can't stop thinking about that couple, what they are telling their children right now, and where they will sleep tonight. Turning our back on families and children who are fleeing a war is not our best strategic interest as a nation, nor is it in our best interest as decent human beings. prgtoken Thank you from Maria Demopolis, Chicago, Illinois.
PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL OF A RULE SUBMITTED BY THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION
Judy Chu (Democrat, CA) \u2014 2017-2-2

I rise in strong opposition to this use of the Congressional Review Act to repeal the Social Security Administration's rule strengthening the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. The rule in question implements already-existing law to establish a commonsense streamlining of information which will help improve our background check system for gun purchases. prgtoken It is important to note that individuals with disabilities are actually more likely to be victims than perpetrators of gun violence, which is why I support more far-reaching gun safety measures like universal background checks and a ban on the most dangerous weapons. prgtoken However, when there have been instances of mass shootings committed by those with a history of mental health issues, top s, including Ryan, have stood on this very floor to say that they believe we should focus on mental health issues. Well, this is their chance to prove that those were not just empty words; but, instead, they are showing their true loyalties and again resisting any attempt to strengthen basic safeguards to ensure responsible gun ownership. prgtoken This is a commonsense regulation that sets a high bar for referring names to the background check system. No one's rights are unduly restricted. An appeals process has been built in to afford due process. So it is clear that my colleagues concerns' are not about safety, but about maximizing profits for gun manufacturers, even if it costs the lives of fellow Americans. prgtoken And worse, they are using the restrictive Congressional Review Act to do so. This will not only make it easier for even those with severe mental health issues to buy a gun, but it will also take the option for writing similar rules off the table forever, tying the hands of all future administrations. prgtoken This is reckless. Gun deaths are a daily scourge in our country, and it is up to us to do whatever we can to mitigate the risk of the dangerous weapons in the wrong hands. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this resolution.
PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL OF A RULE SUBMITTED BY THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Elizabeth Warren (Democrat, MA) \u2014 2017-2-2

for the first time in more than a decade, the Party controls the House, the Senate, and the White House. This week they are starting to roll out their legislative agenda. prgtoken So now that they have complete control of the agenda, what do the s have in store? Something to bump up wages for working families or something to create more jobs? Something to tackle the student debt crisis? Maybe something to deal with all the jobs that get shipped overseas? No, one of the Party's first orders of business is a giveaway to ExxonMobil that will help corrupt and repressive foreign regimes and make it easier to funnel money to terrorists around the world. prgtoken Here is the problem. Big corporations like Exxon--or other oil, gas, and mining companies--often pay millions of dollars to foreign governments to access natural resources located in these countries. Many of these foreign regimes are corrupt, and Exxon's massive payouts regularly end up in the pockets of government officials rather than in the hands of the people. These corrupt officials get filthy rich while their citizens face punishing poverty and dangerous working conditions. Worse still, some of these undisclosed payments can end up financing terrorists. prgtoken Just over 6 years ago, Congress passed a bipartisan provision to help tackle this problem. With the strong support of Senator Dick Lugar, the leading on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Congress required oil, gas, and mining companies to disclose any payments they make to governments to extract natural resources. s and agreed that shining a light on these payments would help combat corruption and terrorism around the globe and help citizens in some of the very poorest nations in the world hold their own governments accountable. prgtoken Disclosing these foreign payments also helps investors right here in the United States so they can make more informed investment decisions. Some investors may want to stay away from companies that could face expensive lawsuits for violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act or other anti-corruption laws. Other investors, quite frankly, may just prefer not to invest in companies that could be helping prop up corrupt foreign governments or indirectly financing terrorism. prgtoken Congress directed the Securities and Exchange Commission to write the rule, and the SEC spent years soliciting input from investors, from human rights advocates, from anti-corruption experts, and from oil, gas, and mining companies. The agency ultimately issued a ruling last year, and it prgtoken worked. The rule gained the support of faith groups, human rights groups, development organizations, and anti-corruption advocates all around the world. The rule also earned the support of investors who collectively controlled more than $10 trillion in assets, and--we should really be proud--it set an internati