Brad Sherman

I am told there are soybeans ready to export across the Pacific that may not be purchased in another country.

I think we should consider focusing on what is going to be the cost efficient, the most flexible, the most agile, the most resilient for the Taiwanese defense budget.

All of us can imagine the mainland invading Taiwan. That is a nightmare.

The status quo is acceptable. It has worked.

There is so much vibrancy there, so much lifeblood that even if 100 talented people a year go to the mainland...

Taiwan's strategy is inherently defensive.

Criminals and diseases benefit by excluding Taiwan from organizations designed to combat crime and disease.

I am very concerned that China has tried to keep Taiwan out of international organizations.

We should no longer hesitate to send our Secretary of Defense, or Secretary of State, or National Security Advisor to Taiwan.

I have been a strong supporter of the Taiwan-U.S. relationship.

As Representative Brad Sherman said, those are just the ones that begin with the letter H.

We should regard them all as arms of the Chinese government.

Should we do something equally? Or does the fact that they wall off parts of their economy have no effect on our CFIUS decisions?

It would be interesting to go and campaign to our constituents and say, I stood firm in the Financial Services Committee against considering American jobs when we make American financial decisions.

It should be explicit that only under truly extraordinary circumstances would we entertain an application from a company based in any country that is a state sponsor of terrorism.

This is an important bill. I think it needs to be stronger.

I want to commend you for having a policy against what I call an anti-Armenia railroad and for limitations on investments in Gaza.

I want to commend OPIC for doing what I would like to see other agencies do and that is take congressional input seriously you have adopted by regulation or by policy.

I have been a strong supporter of a unicameral legislature for the Federal Government for a long time.

What's absurd is you haven't--you're not functioning under a long-term authorization. That is not your fault. That is Congress' fault.

I think the basic facts are clear. You do a lot to help international development, which is an important objective of the United States, and instead of at a cost to the taxpayer you actually return some money to the taxpayer.

I was here when Dodd-Frank was written. It was in this room, not Mount Sinai.

What consumers and businesses want is not a lurch to the left or a lurch to the right and then another lurch to the left, but steady and ascertainable regulations.

However, I will point out that right now I would assume the Trump Administration is trying to determine your successor, who will be a full-time person dedicated to being a handmaiden for the financial services industry.

You wage war and peace with the President you have, not the President you wish you had.