Excuse my tardiness. And of course Ms. Lee, I really wanted to be with you at your testimony.

Unfortunately, H.R. 9 goes too far in its approach. And, for that reason, I continue to have serious concerns with this legislation.

I want to add my welcome to Director Sarah Saldana in her first appearance before the House Judiciary Committee.

We all agree that the exploitation of the patent process and abusive patent litigation practices must be stopped.

I was not present for rollcall vote No. 143. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

I stand up to cheer for the Ellison- Grijalva Progressive Caucus budget and what it stands for, and especially for the full employment bill that is woven inside this very spectacular budget. With 20 million Americans unemployed or…

Banning online gaming is not the answer.

One of the important issues that I think should be considered is legislative ways to stop abusive patent litigation because it affects small businesses, and startups, and innovators more profoundly than anybody else.

That is why the former Chairman of this Committee, a Republican, and Zoe Lofgren from California and I, all three of us introduced a bipartisan piece of legislation going back to 2006 to strengthen antitrust law to address net neutrality.

Whatever approach one uses to ensuring an Open Internet inaction is not an option.

If you have sufficient choices, the issues of net neutrality vanish because there is no incentive, no ability whatsoever, to engage in that kind of conduct.

States should be allowed to decide this question for themselves.

Overly broad legislation could engender more, rather than less, litigation and weaken patent enforcement protections, thus discouraging investments in innovation.

I congratulate them on their good work. And I welcome all of our witnesses, especially the chairman of FCC himself, to join in this discussion this afternoon.

I have the following observations which lead me to oppose legislation to amend the Wire Act to prohibit non-state gaming.

As a general matter, I am concerned about expanding mandatory minimums and reducing judicial discretion.

I'm concerned that placing mandatory minimum punishments into any legislation may produce unforeseen and unwanted results.

It is my hope that the hearing today will help refine the issues, provide a voice to child crime victims, and ultimately deliver restitution to those who most need it.

We should be both true to fairness and the rights of victims to be made whole.

We need to address the importance of the ruling by the Supreme Court in Paroline.

this legislation will make this process less responsible, less professional and less accountable.

I'd like to describe what I think are three thoroughly flawed bills.

Although proponents of this legislation claimed in 2005 that the Act was necessary to curb forum shopping by plaintiffs, in reality this law has proved to be the ultimate tool for forum shopping by defendants.

The Act offends federalism by undermining State laws in State courts.

When Congress considered the measure 10 years ago, I warned that it would simply benefit corporate wrongdoers to the detriment of large numbers of people who suffer great harm.