I am very concerned about a step backwards in terms of ending the casino-style betting that got us into the 2008 crisis.

Does anybody here think that it is good to simply deny our obligations, to say, 'We don't really need this,' or, 'We don't have the courage to pay for it now, we will let somebody else pay for it later'?

Bottom line is we are here today to discuss an option because we haven't got the courage or the fortitude to do what we have to do, which is to increase revenues.

Do people on this panel think that we need more money into the Highway Trust Fund?

I see the economic crisis having been--no one person or one group is to blame. It is all of us, if you want the truth.

I happen to think that, no matter what the number is, I think our infrastructure system is crumbling, and we are turning into a Third World country over time.

Recognize that the success of dedicated funding, financing methodologies, and partnerships are all dependent on the identification and stability of long-term supporting revenue streams.

I am not for overregulation.

But I have no interest whatsoever in driving up your costs on unnecessary, duplicative regulation. That is stupid. I am not interested in that.

I believe the government has a role to play in drawing lines, saying, 'You can't cross this line,' for a lot of people.

And in the end what ends up happening is you end up having lots of regulations that are not enforced--which I also think is probably one of the biggest problems we have.