Instead, Republicans chose to cut taxes for large corporations and the super wealthy, and left Americans hoping that those cuts would somehow trickle down to workers.

Independent analysis shows that within 10 years, more than half of working families will pay higher taxes than they would have before the new GOP tax law.

the Republican tax bill serves special interests and will cost our children dearly for generations to come.

Why is now the right time to expose consumers again to the kinds of systemic risk that got us into this financial crisis in the first place?

If, God forbid, that--you know, I hope I am wrong--but if this banking bill were to lead us into another financial crisis, would this Administration want to oppose any public bank bailouts for banks that took on too much systemic risk?

I think Apple is seeing that real money. My constituents are still waiting for their real increase in wages.

we were chasing the capital offshore. And without capital there was no productivity growth. And without productivity growth, there was no wage growth.

I am looking forward to seeing how this models out over time, or how the models match up to reality.

if you want to guarantee families $4,000 in their income, why not just cut out the middle man and give them a $4,000 tax cut in their income taxes?

I am curious if the President is interested in reciprocity and proportionality, so much of our challenge there in terms of abuse has been with China not with Canada.

My Republican colleagues could have joined with Democrats to invest in children, to invest in workers, education, our long-term economic success.

the corporate tax cuts just passed by my Republican colleagues would lead to a $4,000 increase in average household income.

Instead, they handed out goodies to large corporations and the uber wealthy, and risked our long-term economic health.

The Republican tax bill serves special interests and will cost our children dearly for generations to come.

I'd love to hear somebody say, 'the buck stops here' instead of 'whole-of-government approach.'

We're running out of time.

Saying 'whole-of-government approach' is not a substitute for action.

I fear that the phrase 'whole-of-government approach' has become a catchall for 'it's someone else's job.'