Peter Roskam

I think Congress should get back to focusing on the needs of the people back home, and not the special interests here in Washington, D.C.

For students to form their consciences correctly, they have to be exposed to a wide variety of competing ideas.

Let's get something straight: Section 501(c)(3) does not require schools to prohibit student political activity on campus.

When colleges and universities suppress speech, however, we have to question whether that educational mission is really being fulfilled.

But is this bargain truly benefitting the American taxpayers or the students, when colleges suppress speech on campus?

Every single year American taxpayers give colleges and universities billions of dollars worth of tax breaks.

Welcome to the Ways and Means Subcommittee on Oversight, our hearing on protecting the free exchange of ideas on college campuses.

Chairman Roskam Announces Hearing on Protecting the Free Exchange of Ideas on College Campuses

I would urge the Committee today to look carefully at all the guidance that is already out there.

Mr. Chairman, you have convened a really interesting discussion today.

It is a problem vis-a-vis the Iranians, it is going to be a problem vis-a-vis any other bad actor.

Silence is assent. And the unwillingness to answer Chairman Ryan's question I think is troubling.

Time is short, so let me urge you to reconsider this OFAC question, because I think it is a problem.

I think there is unanimity on the committee that we want the IRS to follow the law as the law is written.

They have not been responsive.

We need your help and we need your personal help substantively because we are meeting a lot of passive-aggressive folks that do not want to be helpful.

This is a system that desperately needs to change.

That is gentle, 'stands common sense on its head.' I am with you.

If they just think this Committee's going to lay back and not be a challenge to that, they are sorely mistaken.

I urge caution, because I am telling you what, we are interested, and we are particularly interested in making it difficult to do that.

I remain deeply concerned that the President will use nonnuclear sanctions to respond to Iranian misbehavior and illicit activity.

So it would promote more companies doing more business in Iran, paying more taxes in Iran, creating more revenue for the Iranian Government, and the result, allowing more resources to help direct terrorism activities.

It seems to me that the tax provisions are that much more important with this agreement.

I really believe this committee needs to continue to explore tax measures which discourage business with Iran while continuing, especially while Iran continues to fund terrorism.

But the only thing worse than Iran that does these things, is an Iran that does these things and has nuclear weapons.