I hope we can move forward in a bipartisan manner to change our laws and oversight to make sure we keep our people safe.

our nuclear deterrent is the ultimate protection against a nuclear attack on the United States and through extended deterrence, it also serves to reassure our distant allies of their security against regional aggression

the United States would be prepared to reduce ceilings on deployed strategic warheads by as much as one-third below New START levels

I hope you can understand my general concern, which is it took a court order to have the NRC follow a clear legal mandate.

I rise in strong support of the flood insurance fix bill on the floor today. I urge my colleagues on a bipartisan basis to come together and pass this first crucial step toward getting it right with the National Flood Insurance Program. It…

You have said several times you don't have adequate resources, so I am talking about that broader challenge.

If you become completely process oriented, I am sure you are dealing with more because you have created that process.

I do want to note for the record her aggressive fight for complete transparency of agencies under the jurisdiction of this committee.

If you believe most or all of these sites are not safe or not safe enough, then that is a good result.

You know, I think oftentimes in Government, and in Washington in particular, we become very process-oriented and lose the forest for the trees.

Thank you, Madam Chair, for convening today's hearing.

It seems very clear that Eximbank financing in many cases has given foreign carriers a significant competitive advantage against domestic carriers.

Like many others, I continue to be concerned about Eximbank deals that finance projects essentially in direct competition with U.S. businesses.

If the government had been more forthcoming about what is not known about the leaked chemicals, citizens and local officials would have been able to make better choices about the actions needed to protect their families and communities.

I want to get back to this push for us to talk in a fairly precise, disciplined way about the science and not be cartoonish about it.

Is it in particular a problem when we have allies and partners with less capable defenses than we do, and how do you handle that?

Well, 97 percent is very catchy. But what is the underlying question?

But within CYBERCOM, do you have the authorities and the policies you need to do all of that effectively?

I am afraid these policies just show the international community three things: how to undermine chances of economic recovery and growth, how to achieve the lowest work force participation rate since the Carter administration, and how to…

I appreciate that. I think the timing of that response says a lot.

Last week the press reported that Russia had used cyber-attacks against Ukrainian telecommunications, to hamper Ukrainian leadership's ability to access that.

Well, as you know, these three projects that under the law you can't consider, you clearly cannot consider, they form the majority of your discussion about the regs.

I think we do a real disservice to science and facts the way we often do a cartoonish gloss over these issues.

Future generations are going to look back to this moment and judge each of us, each of us, by whether we start to act on this issue.

I would underscore and encourage that with regard to CYBERCOM in particular.