I certainly have no reason to believe that it is, but obviously I'm concerned about it.

I am generally very favorable to that sort of approach.

I asked for this job, and most of the folks in the Congress do want to move this country off dead center and move it forward.

We have to keep pace with the economic changes that are going on in the world.

Today we send a strong and dear message.

We cannot continue to progress as a country unless we have a more vigorous response to this problem.

I think the Senate will support it on a bipartisan basis.

I've been to Iowa twice, and I know how much flooding you've had.

We will not allow terrorists and smugglers to dishonor the millions of immigrants who live here lawfully.

We have a whole range of other issues out there.

The tax burden is the way it is because we seek to reverse what happened in the 1980's, where taxes went up on the middle class and down on the wealthiest Americans.

The Government's relationship to the private sector are changing the nature of that relationship.

Until we find a way to reward the working poor and to move people from welfare to work, our economic recovery is going to be limited.

If we don't do [NAFTA], anybody who wants to shut a plant down in America and move it to Mexico for lower wages can do that anyway.

I mean, look at the system, we're the only country, the only advanced country that does what we do.

Absolutely not.

More than any other one which has been presented by any party, it reduces the deficit in a way that is fair to all the American people.

Under any conceivable deficit reduction plan, including mine, you can bring the deficit down for 5 years and then it starts to go up again in the sixth year.