I want to see the Commission do everything possible to protect the safety of the American people.

in a democracy, maybe the people of America might know how you voted.

I hope and believe that it is not necessary to wage personal attacks against each other to disguise our philosophical differences.

I think he has tried to do his job with dedication and sincerity.

I see no logical reason why the NRC cannot also have a public voting meeting so that the American people can see what the NRC is doing.

Everybody agrees that the function of the NRC is to protect the safety of the American people; that is its job; it is not to be a proponent of nuclear power, and in the case of Vermont, against the wishes of the people of Vermont, who did…

Commissioner Svinicki has, consistent with an industry request, required that Fukushima reforms be subject to a cost-benefit test that could water down their effectiveness.

Impatience or extreme is not a quality that I would like to see on the Commission.

If the NRC does not move forward to reform its voting process to be open and transparent, I will be introducing NRC reform legislation to mandate a transparent public voting process.

We absolutely need to get to the bottom of this issue to ensure that Montana farmers and ranchers and others see their funds returned.

I just want to make sure that the individuals are held responsible.

I appreciate you holding this important hearing.

I think the regulators are currently deciding which of the nonbanks are going to be part of systemic risk oversight.

Mr. President, I wish to inform all Senators that on Friday, May 25, 2012, the Committee on Rules and Administration adopted amendments to the following regulations: Senate Office Building Regulations; and Smoking Policy--Rules X, Rules…

And are there limits?

I was a proponent in the Dodd-Frank of increasing corporate governance and fought to have included in Dodd-Frank a provision, 165(h), requiring all banks with over $10 billion in assets and all nonbank financial firms supervised by the Fed…

What is to stop this from happening again, maybe being a larger loss of the same type, but particularly at a weaker or less well capitalized institution?

Is there a limit to how much the claw back is or anything else in your policy or it is discretionary?