Jamie Raskin

I think fundamentally that less government is better.

I think Rabbi Saperstein's with me on this.

But it's up to them. We agree under the First Amendment, they define their religion any way they want.

This is not about being able--George Soros being able to channel millions of dollars from a not-for-profit through churches or synagogues or mosques into politics.

Since then, churches and other c(3)'s have had to decide whether or not to directly violate the law and risk potentially losing their tax status altogether...

We must never forget those great words: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...

The First Amendment is the First Amendment for a reason.

Do we need to create an ombudsperson, somebody who is just a champion of the students and the graduates to make sure that they are not getting ripped off?

The overall institutional sense that I get is one of basic passivity and reactivity to events rather than getting on top of it.

I get complaints on a daily basis pretty much from my constituents who feel like the whole system is a scam.

So just to get you straight there, they are using your website essentially as the framework to access their victims.

But how do they profit from it? They take over the student's account?

But when we look at the video footage that Congressman Scott offered us...

It looks like we've got the classic tragedy of the commons problem, where you've got a common-shared resource that, if everybody were left to their own individual devices and interests, then we would rapidly be depleted.

I thank Congresswoman Jayapal for that excellent discussion of the pro-choice question and other jurisprudence. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the distinguished gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).

I want to thank Ms. Waters for her zealous work on behalf of her constituents and all Americans. Madam Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Nadler), our distinguished colleague, who is a leading member of the House…

With my colleague Pramila Jayapal, from the State of Washington, on behalf of the Progressive Caucus, we are taking this Special Order hour to focus on the question of the Russian connection. This is a matter of utmost seriousness and…

I don't understand how that's fair.

That just strikes me as really antithetical to the constitutional design.

One of our great American aphorisms--I think it's attributed to Ben Franklin--is that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

What's striking to me, though, is that those people who have gone through it or have had an immediate family member go through it, look at something like a proposed $6 billion cut in NIH medical research budget and are horrified by it.

This legislation, however it turns out today, will crash the system, which is what their chief strategist, Steve Bannon, has said he wants to do. If a foreign power like the Russians proposed to do this to America, we would consider it an…

Now, understand, I guess my concern is that if we are going to, again, use tools, it seems to me that we would do everything in our power to make sure that those tools are used in a fair way.

I doubt many Americans realize that when they go down to the DMV to get their driver's licenses, their photos could be made part of a database that can be searched by the FBI.

What we don't know at this point is what specific regulatory changes might be forthcoming from the administration in this field and how they would affect the environment and affect workers.