when in fact it has been a huge success.

There is a cost to what EPA is doing--and it will be borne in east-central Ohio and in communities just like it across the heartland.

As someone who has been considered many times in the ranking system as the most conservative member of the U.S. Senate, I have always said that in some areas I am a pretty big spender, national defense, infrastructure, something that we…

These are the kinds of problems that can only be fixed by Congress.

I believe, and so do many other economists, that imposing, that using the Clean Air Act toolkit to regulate greenhouse gases would impose unnecessary costs and would have next to no health benefits for the United States.

I have joined him on his bill that is going to require the EPA or a new commission made up of the Secretaries of Energy...

A regulatory approach to regulating greenhouse gas emissions would cost six times as much as the cap and trade approach that Congress has already rejected.

I applaud Senator Inhofe for introducing the Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011 to preclude EPA from using the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gases.

I would only mention, and ask if you disagree with this segment of the unions, in terms of the boiler MACT up to 800,000 jobs at risk.

I think the recent EPA study clearly showed biases in this area and I am quite surprised...

America's expertise in science, technology and innovation has made us a leader in the global economy. But our role as a global leader is being challenged, and we need to be smart about how to maintain our competitive edge.

What is the risk level of funding sustainment requirements at 85 percent?

I do think that we have to take seriously our responsibility to curb government waste where we find it, and to eliminate and prosecute fraud and abuse.

But we want to be careful as we are examining these things that it is really fraud that we are after and not honest disaster victims who made reasonable good-faith decisions in the aftermath of a storm.

It does not make any sense to me that the House of Representatives would cut funding from these important programs, $1.5 billion in additional funding is needed just to meet the cost of eligible projects for this year.

What concerns me is right now in this Congress, there are efforts to significantly reduce funding for the Department of Homeland Security to cover an existing shortfall in FEMA's Disaster Relief Fund (DRF).

the reason that we are into this mess in the first place is because the Republican leadership, in my view, undercut funds to FEMA.

This is exactly the money that is necessary for FEMA to keep up their computer software and reporting mechanisms to cut down on fraud and abuse.