Elizabeth Warren

I am just very intent, as you might be able to tell, that we not, in effect, convert this statute, this far-seeing visionary act of genius by our forbearers in this institution, to a maintenance fund to fix roads and curbsides in our…

Sir, I just want to underline that number. That is 99.25 percent of all lands purchased for the Department of the Interior go for filling in holes that were privately held in the middle of Federal park lands.

This is who we are, and it is one of the greatest things about this country.

The Land and Water Conservation Fund is a good example about how environmental protection and economic growth can reinforce each other.

I just think the fundamental question here is once we start saying well this is a slush fund for covering deferred maintenance then, forget it.

I am looking forward to working with my colleagues to reauthorize and fully fund this program so we can continue to have all of the tools we need to protect this land for our kids and our grandkids.

Well some have suggested that the Federal Government is using these tools to expand the footprint of Federal lands in our states.

The 3 percent cap is an important step toward fixing the broken noncompetitive market for title insurance.

Access to mortgages is painfully tight, especially for people who are not well to do, and we should find responsible ways to increase access to credit.

The Mortgage Choice Act should not fool anyone. ... I urge my colleagues to oppose this bill.

There are a lot of proposals that are being pitched as improving access to credit that are really about letting the mortgage industry dig deeper into consumers' pockets.

I have often wondered how the regulators would calculate the benefits of avoiding another financial crisis.

Is FSOC willing to reverse the designation of a company if it finds that the company no longer poses systemic risk?

Dodd-Frank gives you a lot of flexibility in these circumstances.

The FSOC designation process is critically important to ensuring the safety of our financial system and guarding against another crisis.

So use the magic word here: Yes?

The House Republican budget and the Senate Republican budget were released last week, and both say that they support medical research funding, but what the Republican budgets actually do is lower the budget caps that are already crushing…

Every single Member of Congress I have spoken with says that they support NIH and they support more medical research, but medical research takes money, and Congress has done absolutely nothing to actually get more money into the Agency.

Now earlier this year, I introduced the Medical Innovation Act, a bill that would boost NIH funding by about $6 billion a year.

Clearly, Congress is choosing to pay up in a big way later on.

Alzheimer's forces families to watch helplessly as their loved ones slip away.

So I do not think it is a good idea to ask them to do again what they previously failed to do spectacularly.

So when we are talking about the risks that the $50 billion banks pose to the economy, we need to consider that not just one bank could go south at a time, but that two or three or four could be following similar business practices.

After the financial crisis, Congress decided that the bigger banks should be subject to more oversight than the smaller banks.

It doesn't matter what Republicans say about supporting innovation if their budgets actually cut support for NIH.