Daniel E. Lungren

Madison said it best. He talked about if--if men were angels, we wouldn't need government.

I think you do what we've done in the past, which is require the companies responsible to pay for the remediation.

And the answer--I think we've given an answer to the question. The question is, how do we remediate that damage that was done?

Senator Everett Dirksen once said a billion dollars here, a billion dollars there, pretty soon you're talking about real money.

I would argue that under the Constitution it is not.

I fear the growing trend in law enforcement is contributing to the erosion of the public's trust that it will receive impartial and fair justice.

A healthy skepticism of government... has been replaced in some cases with outright cynicism, and that is in fact harmful to our democracy.

I have observed with concern the American public, who appears to have lost some considerable faith with the present state of our politics and governance.

We identified Iran as a cyber growing threat.

I believe identifying the threat is critical to combating this problem and protecting our critical infrastructure.

I believe we are safer today because of DHS, even with all the warts and the shortcomings that we have.

The fix here is fairly simple, at least in terms of protecting our electric-producing grid.

The failure of this responsibility renders all others meaningless.

I don't want to be an alarmist on this. I want to be a realist on this.

It is critical that we continue our vigilance and oversight efforts in order to address this continuing threat.

Nuclear and radiological terrorism is my greatest fear. It would represent an unprecedented catastrophic event, causing enormous death, destruction, as well as long-term economic disruption.

I am hopeful that these incidents represent the low-water mark for FPS, and I am cautiously optimistic about FPS's future.

It bothers me a great deal that the President had an opportunity for almost 3 and a half years to work on efforts for immigration reform, 5 months before an election decides to announce this particular policy.

This seems like such pure common sense to me, it is a little amazing that we have sat around here for over 2 decades before something as simple as this has come forward.

What it does is change the process and provide an incentive for resolution of the problem in a specific, practical way.

These litigants usually have no intent whatsoever of obtaining increased accessibility for persons with disabilities.

Unfortunately, however, across the nation and especially in my district in California, thousands of lawsuits have been filed under the ADA in which litigants have the sole intent of obtaining settlement money from small business…

I just think the richness of the life that we have in this country could be greater if we were not intimidating and discouraging people, especially small business folks.

I mean, Tony Blair said just 2 days ago that the West is asleep on this issue--that even he underestimated the power of the narrative of the violent Islamists.