John Shimkus

I, too, rise in support of this amendment. It is my understanding this amends section 18 to ensure the FAA, State and local building code inspectors, and fire marshals are at the guidance-making table. I understand the officers believe…

No, I understand the physiology. I got that. I am just telling you the problem with this bill. But the question is, the device, labeled as toxic, thrown in a municipal waste field would then become a Superfund site under current law. And…

The answer is, under current law, H.R. 535, not amended, the answer is yes. So why would they make it?

Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chair, on my time, I have a question for the gentleman from California (Mr. Ruiz). I have great respect for the doctor and his medical knowledge--just two questions. One, if the medical…

And if it is toxic, which means it would be defined as harmful to a baby, why are we using it in a baby to fix the heart?

And that device that you have is a per- or polyfluorinated compound; is that correct?

Just to clarify: one is that we are exempting airports from Superfund liability, but we are not exempting medical devices that are FDA approved in infants' bodies?

There are certain key details of this legislation that would mean dramatic and radical departure from longstanding abortion-related policy.

I have said it for 20 years. Someday, someone is going to believe us, that there is a funding problem on Social Security, there is funding problem with Medicare.

So how do--by adding more people to Medicare, how does it help solve this 2026 funding problem?

This LNG debate is critical. And this--international security issues cannot be subordinated by anti-oil sentiment for freedom and democracy and rule of law in Eastern Europe.

First, domestic decarbonization goals are not possible to achieve with current technology, regardless of the proposed regulatory programs.

What is not often discussed is whether this drive to change our domestic energy and economic system is really the most appropriate and effective approach as a matter of U.S. policy to address climate risks.

Transforming the American economy to produce net zero carbon dioxide emissions in 30 years...requires forcing dramatic change on a scale that is hard for most people to comprehend.

That is just an economic fact and reality.

So a cost burden on us with no international constraint--the recent announcement by China just yesterday--will indicate that we will do this for nothing.

I would just say a word of warning.

So I think for anyone to not focus on the cost of transition, you are going down a dangerous path.

When I was going over the testimony and what we have gone--you know, the Congress and where we are at today, it was only 8 years ago that we were trying to move to a cap-and-trade program, and we were moving to national healthcare under…

So, listen, I met Sister Kathleen from Monastery Creations, and I am not going to cross her.

To move quickly and get something across the finish line would require working together.

I think we are raising appropriate questions to make sure. And I look forward to working with you as we move forward.

I think American consumers want to know, or already believe, that someone is taking a look at these products to ensure safety.

I think businesses should have certainty that legal products they manufacture for commerce in Illinois should be legal in New Jersey, and every other State.

Thanks to Chairman Pallone for continuing to work with us to develop a bipartisan product to create a uniform framework for cosmetic product regulation based on science in which both consumers and businesses can have confidence.