Tom McClintock

That was compensated damage as opposed to the economic damage done by the government's policies, which has been uncompensated to the people affected.

Maybe instead of more bureaucrats, what we need is a little less bureaucracy.

From what I have seen, it appears that the government may have done as much damage to the economy as the accidental blowout did.

The crux of the argument in favor of the bill is that the provisions of the compact signed by the tribe limited both the number of machines and proximity to other establishments.

I think back to Walt Disney, who acquired the land for Disney World in the same manner.

You are not following the law. You are changing an administrative policy. You have changed what was an administrative policy under George Bush to a new administrative policy under President Obama.

Engaging in commerce is not a crime. You know, conducting gambling on sovereign Indian land is not a crime.

The tribe is entirely within its rights, under the terms of that contract, because of the nature of the acquisition itself.

The principal factor that was cited in these mill closures was the dwindling supply of timber coming from Federal lands.

We cannot even get fire, salvage fire killed timber because the litigation delays the process beyond the period where that timber can be salvaged.

This Administration's underlying agenda is to promote a so-called 'green transmission system'.

My bill pulls the plug on this program before taxpayers end up holding the bag for these projects.

I find it disturbing that you would come here and make that kind of representation.

When we were managing that land in a sustainable manner it supported a thriving economy.

I have to ask you, if you are not going to relinquish these lands, what are you going to do to use this tremendous asset that you are sitting on to restore prosperity to these communities?

Perhaps we can reach bipartisan agreement on that, Mr. Markey.

Taxpayers are being asked to risk $3.25 billion on the same technology and by the same Administration that has just delivered the Solyndra scandal.

But you are not increasing it. It has declined.

It is amazing, when you pull out a pocket calculator, the lunacy of some of the requirements and the costs that they impose, real costs on real people paying real electricity bills every month.

Consumers deserve to know the actual cost of what they are paying for, and this measure does so.

I just wanted to underscore the point you made, that these are fixed costs, as opposed to the ESA costs, which are volatile and steadily mounting.

My advice would be not to wait for Federal legislation, just give it your best shot, so that people at least have a ballpark estimate of what they are paying through their power bills for all of these mandates.

The Chair is delighted that at this hearing of the Water and Power Committee the Ranking Member has had an epiphany on free markets.

I think the public would be absolutely appalled to see such numbers.

And those ESA costs have nothing to do with power generation. They are tacked on, having nothing to do with that power generation.