We should expand the regular R&E tax credit.

I believe tax policies ought to encourage long-term hold, early-stage capital formation.

The mission of NSF has basically morphed into one of supporting scientists at universities.

Minnesota, in my State, has led medical innovation for more than 60 years and boasts more than 400 medical device companies.

I think the greatest job and wealth creator in the next 25 years, worldwide, will be the energy sector.

One of the areas that we've had the most precipitous decline in the last decade is the slowing of early-stage capital formation.

The longer it takes to get a new device to market, the less certainty investors have and the more capital businesses need.

The markets of tomorrow are not just going to be domestic, they're going to be all over the world.

Already, FDA's inconsistent approval process has dampened investment.

I don't think our country's had much of an innovation or growth strategy for the last decade-plus.

It is long overdue. And I appreciate your interest in both competitiveness and innovation.

I personally believe not only should the R&E tax credit be made permanent, but it should be raised from 14 percent, hopefully up to 20 percent.

I know he has been working very hard--a group of us have been working hard on making sure that credit is getting out there to small businesses, as well.

America is one of the few major industrial countries in the world that doesn't even have a competitiveness strategy.

You can't get this fixed on the deficit side, on only one side of the ledger.

I think it would be very helpful--as most of the American public still questions, I view, the stimulus was, while not pretty, necessary.

Changes to this process are always welcome. Safety should be the number-one focus.

Mr. President, I rise today to mark a sad day for the National Capital region. On the eve of the 1 year anniversary of the deadliest accident in Metro's history, I would like to extend my deepest condolences to the families of the nine…