Congress has decided to self-neuter ... and when the Congress neuters itself and gives power to an unaccountable fourth branch of government, it means that people are cut out of the process.

The Treasury Department’s payment system contains extremely sensitive and confidential data.

Instead of getting rid of everything, let’s look at it selectively. Don’t throw the baby out with the bath water.

Congress has to catch up to the plan or the president’s plan has to be revised. Because the law is law.

I hope it's short lived because there's real people that depend on these grants. There's no reason for the disruption.

Well, I think there's two things. One, I do believe in extending the tax cuts because I think it makes our economy competitive, like 21 percent tax rate for businesses is what the average is in the world. We don't want to go back to 35 percent or somewhere higher.

I believe President Trump today, after hearing the facts, actually thought what we had yesterday was a reasonably good bill.

Jim, by definition, I believe when you're talking a CR or a debt ceiling, either one, there's enough Republicans who will never vote for it. So, you have to work across the aisle.

We should be very careful about what business we do with China. We should restrict our exports. We should restrict our investments there. They are an adversary.

So, Plan B is probably going to be something that we had yesterday with maybe some smaller revisions to it. And we are going to have to work with President Trump on the debt ceiling.

I think there's two or three things that we could take away from this. We had a reasonably good deal. And by the way, you're never going to get a debt ceiling increased or a CR passed without Democrats' support because we have about 30 Republicans that will not support that in a tight majority.

It is unacceptable.

If our tech sector was its own country, its economy would be the eighth largest in the world.

Where we should be leading on technology rules, America is retreating.

Make no mistake, the new USMCA dispute against Canada's DST is a positive step, but it is too little, too late.

There is no question this is contrary to our national interest.

When you talk about DEI, race, coming up with nicknames, that doesn't play well in this district. They want to talk about the issues. This is an issue district.

How would the court determine standing in a case like this? Would it depend on what position it would be for, what department it would be in?