I completely concur, and I think that's the correct way to frame the issue for the Federal Government moving forward.

I find it odd that somebody would even suggest inferentially that this benefit provision, could itself constitute discrimination against folks in opposite-sex relationships...

We've got a lot of Federal employees ready to retire in the baby boom generation. How are we going to replace them...

There's no question, Mr. Connolly, this is a very valuable tool.

So I'm going to be an enthusiastic supporter of H.R. 2517 and encourage my colleagues to do the same.

As Representative Baldwin indicated, look at other ways of trying to address the issue of fairness in the provision of benefits.

If we are going to subsidize people because we think transit is good, instead of subsidizing transit agencies that tend to build urban monuments, maybe we should give those subsidies to the transit users.

I think there is a clear role for private operators and an expanded role.

I am intrigued with some of your comments about the growth of the private company bus competition in the Boston-to-Washington corridor.

I just want to say I am very interested in these ride-sharing approaches.

A Risky Choice for a Risk Czar

I need some more convincing of the creation of this Consumer Protection Agency.

We should not need the GAO to identify problems with continual and unforeseen increases in cost.

I cannot hear you.

With the dramatic rise in volume and value of contracts, we must enhance our management and oversight capacity so we are maximizing return for the taxpayer.

Our acquisition challenges are real. With these systemic challenges, it is not surprising that we have not resolved problems exemplified by the V-22 Osprey.

I hope that we can use the lessons from the V-22 to identify steps that we can take to avoid repeating these mistakes in the future.

Yes, but in this particular case we have a report from the GAO that says that in this, with respect to the V-22, this is a chronic problem.