I was startled to see the broad support for a single-sector approach in this.

I was wondering if you think there's a merit for us looking into that as a systematic way of not--of increasing the pie?

I introduced last year the Keep STEM Talent Act that is a rifle shot at the high skill thing.

what is scientifically necessary is so far beyond what is politically possible. And that is a path to suicide.

It's dumb, it's irresponsible. And, oh, by the way, zero marginal cost energy is cheaper.

This should not be a partisan vote. This is a vote about America. It is a vote about our democracy and our oath to the Constitution. We all took an oath to protect the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. We all know…

Prescription drug prices are out of control. Year after year, we see prices rise. Old drugs become unaffordable, and new drugs may cost more than a house. That is why I support H.R. 3, the Elijah E. Cummings Lower Drug Costs Now Act. This…

This dwarfs the financial crisis, and presumably a lot of those homes will be subject to 30-year mortgages.

If the justification for not creating the OTA is that in 25 years we haven't found the political will, in 25 years we haven't found the political will to get serious about climate change. That is no reason for inaction.

I think I can say this with confidence but one needs to be careful about superlatives in this line of work. I think I am the only Member of Congress as a freshman who made a campaign promise before getting elected to restore the OTA.

I introduced H.R. 5194, the Climate Change Financial Risk Act, with Senator Schatz, of course, introducing the companion bill in the Senate.

Right now, if we don't change direction, we are at 4 degrees of warming.

The reasons for that are, and I am sure you know this, but just to reiterate for everyone here, from 2016 to 2018, average economic losses from natural disasters were $150 billion.

At 8 degrees, Manhattan feels like Qatar, essentially. It is really unpleasant.

the U.S. is not currently the global leader in weather forecasting.

There is a fundamental equity problem that, if we charge the market rate for insurance, people aren't going to have insurance.

Has the gentleman from Texas closed? The CHAIR. The gentleman from Texas has relinquished his time.

I seek to claim the time in opposition. The CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.

I want to absolutely echo your point that we need to be goal- rather than path-focused.

If my cell phone is any predictor, this is not the Committee hearing that most of the country is watching today.

You cannot be happy that your leadership has put you in a position to defend an anti-scientific history.

When we politicize the Constitution, we put our republic at jeopardy, and when we politicize science, we put our species in jeopardy.

It's fundamentally disingenuous to assert, as EPA has, that the rule will not be applied retroactively to existing regulations.

We are asked to trust that people led by science deniers are going to make that decision right.

Our colleagues over in the Intelligence Committee right now are defending the Constitution from the White House.