Lisa Murkowski

We are hopeful that there will be a useful framework as we work on our energy legislation.

We know that it is an issue.

I feel like I have got a second bite at the apple because you were before the Energy Committee not too many weeks ago.

The cost of regulations that is the big barrier to market for new nuclear projects.

I am trying to chase rumors, so if anybody has more detailed information, I think it would be helpful to know.

I for one have concerns with the possibility that Yucca would be used for anything other than the statutory use as a repository for the spent nuclear fuel and our high level defense waste.

I really do hope that we have full cooperation and participation from the Secretary and from his team in identifying how we can truly move this forward.

I do feel that it is imperative that as we look to our energy portfolio as a Nation that we be working actively to advance the nuclear portfolio when it comes to our energy needs and our energy security.

I have been critical of this program I think you know, and have questioned the need and the justification for a direct loan program for auto makers and these component suppliers.

I think it will be timely, and, again, an issue that you have and I have discussion on.

We are, of course, trying to move forward with an Arctic deep water port, and the port study has been underway for some period of time.

I think we need to assert that leadership and do so in a way that is smart and safe, but again, really recognizing our full potential there.

I am enthusiastic about the release of the Corps' Draft Report regarding the Deep Draft Arctic Port System Study.

I am going to want to know for sure that we are going to be able to address some of these needs.

The situation is that they can't wait for a period of years that it takes for the funds to be appropriated for a feasibility study.

I was somewhat disappointed that fiscal year 2016 request doesn't meet the target set out in WRRDA of $1.3 billion.

We are an infrastructure-poor State. We face some challenging conditions when it comes to construction of some of our infrastructure along our coastline.

I will be asking you more about what we can be doing in the intercoastal communities to provide for that necessary arctic infrastructure when it comes to ports and our harbors.

At the subcommittee hearing, I asked about funding for the Continuing Authorities Program, specifically Sections 103 and 107.

I am going to be starting off I think every appropriations hearing I'm participating in challenging agencies and members of the administration as to where we are with implementation of any aspect of an Arctic strategy.

States should deliver on student achievement, and Federal funds awarded should in part be predicated on demonstrated student outcomes.

The Federal role should be to ensure high standards in each State (but not dictate what those standards should be).

Innovation for the sake of innovation is unlikely to be helpful.

The proposed solution to both is simply to provide greater flexibility to States and districts to spend Federal funds in ways that best support the education of their children.

There is no question but that programs based on 'innovation' should be time limited and that States should be required to show objective results within a specified period of time.