Richard Shelby

The majority of the Republicans in the Senate a year or so ago voted against reauthorizing the Bank because we could not get real meaningful reform.

A lot of us have pushed for overall and comprehensive bank reform.

I for one would not want to support a big reduction just for the biggest of the biggest and do nothing for our basic base and job creation small- and medium-sized businesses.

I came on this Committee for one reason. I knew how important the infrastructure challenge was in this country and in this Congress.

There has to be a combination of other things. But there is so much more money in the private sector, if we figure out a way to leverage it up here.

We have to address our infrastructure inadequacies.

We can't rest on that. A lot of it is crumbling, as you know. Our population is growing.

Do you believe that the CFIUS statute as now written, which we were all involved in on this Committee, is sufficient for your work?

How do you balance that with the concerns of not exporting things that are so important to our national security with ordinary commerce?

And they are thinking in tomorrow's world through the Internet and everything that goes with it.

The terrorists are very resourceful and very smart in a lot of ways, are they not?

It will hurt our trade overall, will it not?

It is a game changer, is it not?

So they have a lot of promise, perhaps, dealing in space if we ever had a conflict dealing with space.

But we cannot have a gap to occur in our reconnaissance and everything in our intelligence gathering, can we?

Congress has directed the Department of Defense to transition from the use of the Russian-made RD-180 rocket engines.

I do not believe we have our hands around that yet. It is an ongoing deal.

The nation that has the technological advantage has a great advantage.

We cannot rely on, Dr. Roper as you mentioned, yesterday's weapons.

Do the consumers lose on this Covered Agreement, or who loses?

That is a game changer for you.

If there had been more transparency in the negotiations, could that have helped you a lot?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman

I could see sanctions if they were sweeping and if they meant something, they were not porous, not tepid sanctions.

I believe both of you are spot on, on what you are talking about about Russia, but the fact remains that there has been no real response, real concrete response to Putin's moves in Georgia, in the Ukraine, the threats of the Baltics, the…