There are a lot of people that I serve with, in the U.S. Senate, who don't hold defending America as high a priority as I do.

I won't sit here and tell you we're perfect and that we're meeting our requirements exactly, but we're focused on it, and think we're improving.

I really believe that we need to sit down and take a hard look at the planning that has been done for Guam.

If nothing else, I think the last 2 weeks has again reinforced the importance of our military bases in Japan to the Japanese people.

I don't think we need a timeout, but I think we need to make sure that we are moving into the right structure before we put this forward.

I certainly don't want to spend a lot of money on preparing to move this force, knowing that, at the end of the day, all of the predicates that we made the decision on are no longer valid.

My colleagues and the Obama EPA believe that more regulation, even if draconian, necessarily means more benefits and more jobs.

I think we need to know what those costs are. That was introduced by Senator Johanns and myself yesterday. It is called the Comprehensive Assessment Regulations in Economy or CARE Act.

But environmental regulations must be tempered by economic realities.

I think we all embrace the significant air improvements that we have had from the Clean Air Act.

If they are not tempered by reality, Dover will have fewer jobs, fewer businesses, and higher electric rates.

Greenhouse gases are a global problem, they are a problem which the United States can only have a minuscule effect on through actions that we take within our own borders.

It was originally designed, though, to go after what I refer to, and were referred to at that time, as the six real pollutants, and it had nothing to do with CO2.

I commend Senator Inhofe for introducing the CARE Act to require a review of the total costs of major EPA regulations.

I will not be here for another round and I wanted to just make sure that I have, in the record, these statements talking about the effects they are having on jobs

One thing, and I also mentioned this yesterday on the floor of the Senate, is that I was praising the Clean Air Act and the amendments to the Clean Air Act, how successful they have been, how they have reduced pollutants.

The tools in the EPA toolkit are so limited that what they do is produce highly burdensome regulations in the particular areas that EPA can work with and do nothing in other areas.

that would take away the jurisdiction of the Environmental Protection Agency in the regulation of greenhouse gases.