We share your desire to see these implemented successfully.

To the international community, we are saying once again the United States will be the world's policeman.

I fully agree his horrific acts deserve an international response. But what should that response be?

Balancing the Federal and State standards on chemicals and consumer products is a very challenging task.

Frank worked with Senator Vitter to develop the Chemical Safety Improvement Act, a bill that would for the first time require testing of tens of thousands of chemicals that are used in everyday products.

I don't think that Senator Lautenberg and Senator Vitter ever thought that this was going to be a perfect bill.

Our current law on chemical safety, the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976, is broken.

I think you find yourself in the situation that many small States do, that we would like to see something at the national level and see TSCA fixed and see an aggressive effort to deal with toxic chemicals.

We look forward to working with you on constructive changes.

I am excited for today's hearing, and we both plan to use what we hear to strengthen the first real shot at updating this broken law.

What good does Prop 65, what good does it do his people.

Saying it does not make it true.

it is irresponsible to just decide that we should cut any of these programs in the name of poverty reduction.

In New Mexico, senior citizens beg to go back to work because $10 in food stamps was not enough to make ends meet.

But you would agree that we ought to be careful about just cutting those families off food stamps.

I think we still have negative job growth.

I would hope that in America, the starting point is we all care.

Thank you, Chairman and Ranking Member Murkowski for holding this hearing today.