Kevin Yoder

I appreciate the opportunity to speak today, your work in support of transparency, and for considering the small but important change that will advance transparency and the accuracy of information on Federal lobbying.

I think this is a major proposal. I think the committee is going to have to take a look at this administration proposal and make sure this is the best move for the American people, for national security.

This indicates to me, in a very real-world example, that the tariffs on those washing machines and solar panels actually led to a retaliation at the detriment of American farmers.

If we want an agency that is unaccountable to Congress and has been called the most powerful, most unaccountable agency ever created in the Federal Government, then, depending on who wins the Presidency, you are either going to love or…

I can tell you I haven't had many constituents come and say: I wish I had a new Federal regulation that came from an unaccountable bureaucrat to respond to and which I don't have the personnel to handle.

In Kansas, many of my constituents... believe that tariffs and the potential trade wars... could inevitably create big challenges for Kansas workers and farmers.

We are not looking to get into trade wars. We are looking to make sure that U.S. companies can compete fairly around the world.

I am concerned that after everything we have done to help our constituents through tax reform, that tariffs... are going to undermine some of these recent gains.

We are only as strong as our weakest link.

I think we share your interest in modernizing the Copyright Office and making it more useful for the creative artists.

I think we all agree we need to get this right. We are all here to protect our constituents, small businesses, farmers, people who are trying to create jobs and make America prosperous and create opportunity for everyone.

In some ways we are actually regulating... e-cigarettes or vaping products more significantly than combustible cigarettes.

We must keep tobacco products out of the hands of kids and that we need smart regulations to do that.

regulations that reduce liquidity, regulations that actually create more risk by reducing the amount of participants in markets, actually harm our consumers.

In the areas in which you were unable to verify or corroborate the statements, I think we still have an obligation to find the truth.

The 180-days loophole is a longstanding problem with a simple, bipartisan, broadly popular, noncontroversial solution at the ready.

The Email Privacy Act has 304 cosponsors in the House--a bipartisan, veto-proof supermajority of Members of this body.

It is impossible to square a lower standard of evidence for emails older than 180 days with the Constitution's 4th amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure.

Most Americans have no idea that a law written 29 years ago allows the government to open their old emails without probable cause.

I urge the committee to resist these efforts to undermine the bill for several reasons.

It sounds like Congress needs to be more engaged in this and maybe be more direct about what the public expects to happen with their tax dollars.

It is hard to read. And if the allegations in this are correct, it is a really sad testament to the programs that are being authorized by Congress.

the majority of this Congress, including everyone sitting here in this committee, has cosponsored a bill to say that that 1986 law that doesn't protect email the same way we treat paper mail is inappropriate and is in effect a violation of…

I will say that what continues to give me pause, and I think the net neutrality debate is a very interesting one, is the potential camel's nose under the tent regarding future regulation.