Here was the first one I got, cleaned up a bit into paragraphs (the ones you get from this script are one-line-per-sentence, all-lowercase, and have odd spaces before punctuation marks). It was rather longwinded and rambling; shorter ones like you see around are a little more persuasive because they don't show the decoherence of the Markov chain's context:

---

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition of H.R. 525 and the association health plans it creates. There are 44 million Americans who are uninsured in this country and this bill will not even affect 1 percent of them. Not 1 percent. CBO found that only 360,000 uninsured Americans would join AHPs. This bill in fact hurts those who enroll in the plans and will even cause healthcare costs to go up for many other Americans. There has to be a better way to help 44 million uninsured Americans. AHPs will not be accountable to state health regulations. This will leave consumers who enroll in these plans without protection or a right to appeal if their cancer or diabetes treatment or medicines are denied. We can not let that happen again.

Members in this body are faced with a choice: representing consumers and small businesses, or big oil companies. We should not leave the American people in the integrity of this institution. Perception, as we all know, four hurricanes ravaged my home state of Florida and some of the Gulf coast. Three of them literally destroyed parts of the district that I am privileged to represent.

It will not lower their energy prices and it puts in place weak price gouging standards. It also does little to promote additional refining capacity, while gutting important environmental safeguards and creating additional corporate tax breaks. Waiving environmental protections and offering federal tax breaks to oil companies will not entice them to build new oil refineries. While more refineries would certainly help produce more gasoline, oil companies have had the opportunity and financial capability for years to increase their refining capacity. Environmental regulations are not stopping them. Rather, the inability to build profitable refineries has led oil company executives away from constructing or resurrecting them.

An alternative to this bill is being offered by Mr. Stupak of Michigan and others. The Stupak bill would strengthen the hands of the Federal Trade Commission and its willingness and ability and resources to enforce the price gouging remedies that we give the FTC.

The attorneys general of our states are elected by our constituents, they know the conditions in their states better than we do, they have the resources and the discretion under the substitute to decide whether or not it is in the best interest of both the plan and participants to enhance the independent advice market, and we urge congress to adopt this approach.

AARP urges you to stand with us in opposition to these critical provisions in H.R. 2830 in order to provide protections for older workers that are necessary, reasonable and fair, and to ensure that the case is moved along as expeditiously as possible to ensure that workplace hazards are addressed in as timely a manner as possible, thus improving worker safety and health.

OSHA, as is almost every other federal agency, is already required by law to pay attorneys' fees and costs in any proceeding in which it does not win, regardless of why it lost and notwithstanding the fact that the position of the agency was substantially justified. In effect, unless the agency can guarantee that it will win every case it brings, H.R. 742 punishes the OSHA for trying to enforce the law. It also occurs to me that there is a question of the constitutional rights of workers here, that since OSHA is given rather exclusive jurisdiction to protect the rights of our own citizens through regulation.

That is wrong. We should not do it to people serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. They have made tremendous sacrifices on behalf of their country and have served longer deployments than expected.This bill provides important new benefits for our troops and their families need desperately. It includes additional funds for health care services, mental health for veterans, active duty servicemembers and their families, and financial assistance to help members of the national guard and reservist forces lose income when they leave their civilian jobs for active duty.
The people of this country.

I just think we have struck the wrong balance. We need to sunset this bill again for a shorter period of time, and I hope my colleagues will oppose this bill so we might do this effort in a bipartisan manner.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today to express my concern about the current state of our nation's budget woes. I've been running the family ranch for several years and I know what it means to work within a budget. You may have to count your pennies, but you spend your money where it matters most. We can do that without increasing taxes. First off -- our nation's taxpayers deserve an honest budget that gives an account of all future spending. If this administration wants to privatize social security.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time to read the resolution that I believe ought to be before us, Mr. Speaker. The record shows otherwise. It is economics, not regulations, that have led to the shortfall in capacity.