This has nothing to do with science or with the economies. It has everything to do with a religious fervor on the radical left.

There is no possible way anyone in his right mind would actually pay for this.

Is this not an ideological preference by elements on the radical left for wind and solar electricity above all other sources, regardless of the costs, and the costs are considerable?

they are extremely concerned with the impact that the Chu memo policies will have on consumer electricity rates.

I find the vision of this Administration dreary and depressing.

So would it be fair to say that cutting the payroll tax without reducing the obligations that the payroll tax pays for is simply playing a shell game over which taxes are going to pay for those obligations?

We have to ask ourselves what were those policies? The Bush administration increased spending by over 2 percent, over 2.5 percent of GDP.

A year ago, we had one economist after another coming before this committee warning us that the federal government needs to get its finances in order in the next three to five years to avoid a fiscal meltdown that would dwarf the 2008…

Perhaps the reason the ranking member does not remember those days as vividly is because they did not last very long, and those policies produced one of the great economic expansions in our nation's history.

We have squandered enormous amounts of money and precious time proving that the policies of the 1970's do not work.

The Bureau of Reclamation has built over 600 dams and reservoirs in the last century, but two-thirds of them were built in the first 60 years of its existence.

I take a little exception to your comment about comparing the fish, the wild fish versus hatchery fish, to children born at home versus the hospital.