Elizabeth Warren

The deal is the deal, and Congress has two choices: accept it or reject it.

If we reject this deal, Iran's breakout time will go down, and that will increase the pressure to take military action very soon.

No one can say for certain that this deal will prevent a nuclear-armed Iran, and I will not say it.

A nuclear-armed Iran threatens the United States, threatens Israel, threatens the entire world.

The question now before Congress is whether the nuclear agreement represents our best available option for preventing Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

One way the Federal Government could help in this process is providing greater incentives to States that maintain tuition to their public institutions at rates significantly below the national average.

With the Federal Government spending billions of dollars each year on the Pell grant program, understanding how these students are succeeding is an important component.

We just have to go back to the fact that the Federal Government is shelling out $150 billion every year to help students attend college.

$100,000 in debt and very little credit that will actually transfer. For-profit colleges seem more interested in shareholder success than in student success.

When we talk about improving student success, we aren't just talking about getting students through a graduation ceremony--getting them in the row and walking them across the stage. We're talking about making sure that students leave…

I just want to underline what I'm hearing you say about this is putting financial incentives in place so that schools have a reason to invest not just in getting students in through the door, but in having them succeed.

We all know that helping students should be a high priority, and I know that you all see this.

I believe that a mix of funding is important.

They bailed out the biggest financial institutions.

So, I think--and then the question is, does that change the calculus on whether or not we need to find devices in the law for holding the executives of the biggest financial institutions accountable if they threaten to wreck the economy…

The taxpayers should not be put in the position of having to choose between either watching the economy implode or having to bail out these big financial institutions

The shutdown should not require a dime of taxpayer money.

I am absolutely in favor of holding them accountable, and just to add a small fact to this, the corporate executives of the top 14 U.S. financial companies made $2.5 billion in compensation between 2000 and 2007.

In 2008, did we have a law that said that the Federal Government would bail out the biggest financial institutions if they threatened to bring down the entire economy?

No financial institution should be too big to fail, and to me, that means three things.

The shutdown should not create moral hazard by letting the bank's executives escape accountability.

The question is, realistically, how do you get there.

I would like to see something that actually forces the hand of local and State police agencies to actually engage with the campus police agencies.

What happens to those jobs if we lift this ban?

So gas prices is the second question I want to ask about.