Brad Sherman

The more women are given a chance to expand their horizons, the richer, the more advanced the society becomes.

You are not going to be able to persuade them to change just by charm.

This is not a binding deal. This is not a treaty. This is not binding on Iran.

Bernie Sanders is, I believe, the only person on that bill in the Senate.

Maybe we will pick up some more if any of my colleagues are listening to this.

We still have too-big-to-fail. The reason for that is the regulators under Dodd-Frank were given the authority but were not required to break up those that are too-big-to-fail.

The harm to our prosperity done by our current trade policy swamps any benefit that Dodd-Frank was intended to provide.

Unless we hold China responsible for what North Korea does, given the fact that the existence of the North Korean regime is dependent entirely on China, or substantially on China, we are going to have to worry an awful lot about what North…

This new deal with Iran is more intrusive than prior deals.

I have been at this for a long time, and we know that Presidents, though, don't always enforce statutes against Iran.

The one thing everybody that has come to this room seems to agree on is that sanctions can change Iran's behavior.

Deal or no deal, we need to adopt additional sanctions.

The President may not have boxed in Iran and blocked every avenue they have to a nuclear weapon, but he has boxed in Congress

The good is we get rid of--the good is we get the stockpiles, decommission the centrifuges. The bad is they get their $100 billion.

If you take a huge risk by buying a 30-year bond when you are borrowing your money for 30 days, the regulators come in and kiss you on both cheeks.

I assure you that if I could have picked the person to grade my tests in law school, I would have done better.

The best approach to end 'too-big-to-fail' is to end 'too-big-to-fail.'

I would like to know how much money they have on deposit, and then what are the obligations that the host bank or the host country is going to extract from that.

If I can just sneak in one comment. We were just in a classified briefing and a nonclassified non-answer was, I asked the Administration whether they would follow the law, and under those circumstances, punish those banks, and the answer…

One of the reasons not to vote to disapprove is because we will probably fail to override.

The deal is an executive agreement, which is below an executive legislative agreement, which is below a real treaty.

We have to decide how to vote. We have three possible votes coming up.

The ugly is next decade when they could have such an enormous nuclear program that in the words of the President, their breakout time would be basically zero.

This deal has the good, the bad, and the ugly. The good and the bad happened the first year.

When you save hundreds of billions of dollars by keeping legal restrictions it is hard to loosen legal restrictions.