John Garamendi

It is cargo that is the reason why you have ships

Why don't we just ship more cargo, rather than more cash subsidy?

The information is lost on the Administration, as it continues to push the USAID notion of cashing out

First and foremost, I want to make it very clear that I am not going to take a back seat to anybody when it comes to food aid.

If you use a nuclear weapon in any form, in any circumstance, and you are history, period, that is deterrence.

I urge the House to pay attention to the Farm to School Act of 2015. Like my colleague from Arkansas, California is a big agricultural State, and we know that kids go hungry. We have the 2010 Healthy, Hunger-Free Children Act, providing…

You have been a leader on these issues for many, many years and certainly in your territory of Ohio. You saw what happened when the manufacturing plants left; but they are coming back, and we can make policy to do that. I think you may…

If you are flying this UAS near a significant airport, a hub airport or a sub-hub airport, you are violating the law, and you are subject to a fine or even jail time.

Why don't we just simply say, 'All of these UAS must be registered, held by the manufacturer or the seller of that, and the Government has the ability to access that under circumstances relating to an accident or some other incident'?

It seems to me we don't need a Government registration program, but we need the Government to be able to access the registration program that the manufacturers probably already have.

It is a fool's errand to base all of this analysis on the appropriation level rather than on what it would cost to do the process.

Did you consider the use of existing Fast Reactor technology, such as the Russian BN-800, when doing your analysis of Advanced Disposition Reactors? If not, why not?

I am surprised you don't know.

Is that correct? It doesn't exist for this purpose.

I can't wait to invite my colleagues to visit the mixed oxide fuel facility, MOX facility.

I find that unacceptable.

So we actually had the technology. Is that technology in existence today?

It is a matter of priorities. It is a question of priorities. And we have to make those choices, and we often fail to do so.

The chairman is about to introduce a piece of legislation that would set up a fund similar to the submarine fund.

The icebreaker thing has gone round and round, and I think a lot of the problem really lies here in Congress.

Do we need a single Federal agency responsible for getting this done?

Oh, you are good. I guess that is what you get paid for, obfuscation.

I am telling you now that if you guys don't get your act together, then we must pass legislation that designates a specific Federal agency to get this done with a specific timeframe.

I have had it. Several of us sit on the Armed Services Committee also. And I will tell you, this is a very significant national security issue that cannot be delayed any longer.

We need to think about recapitalizing the icebreaker fleet as opposed to using 40-year-old ships.