
I would not support such a concession given the strategic value of the base.
On the record
Quotes from current and former United States senators.
Current senators
















WI-D
WY-R
CO-D
TN-R
CT-D
MO-R
NJ-D
AR-R
IN-R
AL-R
OH-D
NC-R
NC-R
WA-D
WV-R
MD-D
DE-D
PA-D
LA-R
ME-R
DE-D
TX-R
NV-D
AR-R
ND-R
ID-R
TX-R
MT-R
IL-D
IL-D
IA-R
PA-D
NE-R
NY-D
SC-R
IA-R
TN-R
NH-D
MO-R
NM-D
CO-D
HI-D
ND-R
MS-R
WI-R
VA-D
AZ-D
LA-R
ME-I
MN-D
OK-R
UT-R
NM-D
WY-R
WV-D
MA-D
KS-R
KY-R
OR-D
KS-R
OK-R
AK-R
CT-D
WA-D
GA-D
CA-D
KY-R
MI-D
OH-R
RI-D
ID-R
UT-R
NV-D
SD-R
FL-R

VT-I
NE-R
HI-D
MO-R
NY-D
FL-R
SC-R
NH-D
AZ-I
MN-D
MI-D
AK-R
MT-D
SD-R
NC-R
FL-R
AL-R
OH-R
MD-D
VA-D
GA-D
MA-D
RI-D
MS-R
OR-D
IN-RFormer senators

I would not support such a concession given the strategic value of the base.

I do not believe people are always right--or always wrong for that matter--and when the President is right, I support him, but when he is wrong, I do not.

I think the people of the country want a better answer than that when you're talking about the people we're dealing with.

I think we need an answer at that point, thank you.

Thank you, Chairman. Thank you for having this hearing. We had a similar hearing in this committee last March, and at that time all the panelists were for a single, consistent national standard.

The President and the Attorney General have both taken a position, and both agree with the need for preemption.

In the great tradition of Senators, that is what we are expected to do.

We are. Nobody is proposing that we should include a specific timeframe in any law that we require notification in.

OK. Well, that doesn't make a lot of sense to me and, frankly, it just doesn't seem fair.

If I'm understanding that correctly, that means that if a worker at McDonald's doesn't get paid minimum wage, then McDonald's, the corporation, would be responsible as a joint employer because it exerts enough control over that worker.

Madam President, I wish to follow up on what the majority whip has been talking about. Clearly the country is and should be concerned by the President's unilateral Executive action on immigration. He announced this action on November 20 of…

To me, it seems like a clear violation of that statute.

What does is $3 million per detainee and $80,000 to the hardened prisons we have.

the Obama administration has offered no comprehensive plan to responsibly close the Guantanamo detention facility.

Instead of providing answers to these and other questions, which we have consistently sought, what we now have instead is the perception of a President rushing to fulfill a political promise.

there's a lack of trust on the numbers, there's not certainty on what the end game is.

this was a clear directive, from the Congress, in the law, that this administration violated.

I would not ask anybody's children to be in that position, guarding in that type of a condition there, because I'm seeing the abuse that the prisoners have on our guards.