The Republicans accused you of granting the Solyndra loan to benefit a campaign donor, George Kaiser, but the record before this committee shows you acted on the merits.

One of my colleagues earlier said, well we ought to change the law, that's what we thought we were doing.

What Congress ought to be spending its time doing is trying to get Americans jobs and back to work.

We cannot afford to delay further action to tackle climate change if the long-term target of limiting the global average temperature increase to 2 degrees Celsius is to be achieved.

That is no way to conduct a responsible investigation. We should be fair and impartial, and our goal should be to find the truth.

It's pretty obvious what's going on in this hearing room. House Republicans and their coal and oil industry allies are manufacturing a scandal, trying to discredit you, President Obama, the clean energy companies.

Mr. Chairman, I move the committee do now adjourn.

That's your interpretation, but the lawyers said otherwise.

The rest of us are not willing to go along in changing the law.

Something far more important is at stake today than scoring partisan political points.

Investing in Solyndra involved risk, but it was a risk that you thought was worth taking because of the importance of clean energy to our economic future; is that right?

Members on this committee say they are shocked--shocked--that you would invest in a company as risky as Solyndra.

No, the climate is changing, and there is much compelling evidence to suggest that a large part of it is due to human activity.

All of Congress, in passing the bill, as they said, they appropriated $10 billion to cover for loan losses.

We want to know about these taxpayers' dollars that have been lost and how we can learn from this experience not to have it repeated.

I think it's abusive to have the Secretary, any Cabinet-level Secretary here and then make him wait another 45 minutes.

I don't believe in surrender, Mr. Chairman.

You're on the right side of this debate, and I think you are on the right side of history.

You are again being abusive of the witness.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate your holding this hearing on the Mobile Informational Call Act of 2011.

I know the preemption of State laws can sometimes be good for businesses, but it is not clear to me how preemption would help consumers or deter telemarketing abuses.

There can be no intrusion more significant than government telling people they cannot get contraception.

I disagree with the administration in providing that exception.

No single piece of legislation in recent memory has done more to advance women's health and women's access to health services than the Affordable Care Act.

This is not a hearing about abortion. This is not a hearing about whether people can adhere to their religious beliefs and follow their own individual consciences.