Adding a new requirement to an already arduous process will create further challenges for the process of approving economically beneficial land exchanges.

I think it is important for all of us to remember that, you know, whenever people have increased flexibility they can live their lives better.

But it seems particularly unfair that we tell hourly employees who are not government workers that they do not have the same advantage.

It has always been striking to me that federal law puts us in a position where we even need legislation like this.

A much better approach is The Working Families Flexibility Act of 2013 which passed the House over a year ago, but has stalled in the Democrat-controlled Senate.

Economist Casey Mulligan argues the President's Affordable Care Act will push more young women out of the full-time work.

Several regulatory factors tend to add rigidity to the labor market, restricting job growth and labor flexibility.

I assume you would not disagree with that?

So why did the President and Congressional Democrats fight so hard to deny women in the workforce this important choice?

I think that is a great example of how many of these restrictions that are publicly touted as ways of protecting the little guy actually end up hurting the little guy.

I think that is a little bit different than prosecutorial discretion, isn't it? Isn't that a mandate not to enforce the law?

And thank you for your efforts on behalf of our country. You have got a tough job.

my concern is that when you have a national memorandum with national impact... that is meaningfully, legally, constitutionally different than what you have described.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, Secretary Johnson, for joining us today.

I really do want to come to a resolution.

I think it is one of these overlapping areas, which of course makes it more complicated.

We have a big piracy problem in this Nation and certainly globally.

I think that the court got Kirtsaeng right. I am a big proponent of that.