Steve Daines

So my question, I guess, is why wasn't there more consultation with industry before the guidance was issued?

the fact is, is repeatedly misallocated resources, that are meant to really help low-income households

I know industry has been working collaboratively to address cyber and published some best practices in July.

I believe Congress must ensure that HUD is a good steward of taxpayer funding, and I'm sure you'd agree with that.

I think government needs to.

I think that's one of the political concerns we hear.

this is such an important issue for me personally, certainly housing, difference between a house and a home, right, such an important part of America, the American dream and so forth.

Well, let me say this. I spent 28 years in business. I understand aspirational targets, and certainly, we should aspiring to zero.

I think it's important that we all hold ourselves accountable with something that's quantitative.

While the President recognizes the impact of Obamacare on many and has requested changes to other related provisions like the Cadillac tax, he fails to be concerned with the employer mandate's heavy impact on tribes in Indian Country.

this has got to be one of those trends that we want to try to get out in front of as best we can

In Montana, tribes are getting hit with massive fines because of the Obamacare employer mandate.

this disproportionate spending on admin costs doesn't translate into better care in Indian Country.

I have introduced the Tribal Employment and Jobs Protection Act which will exempt tribes and tribal employers from the Obamacare employer mandate.

I'd like to see some clear goals set, that we want to take admin costs as a percentage--if they're at 12 percent today, how do we get to 11 percent, 10 percent, and 9 percent over the course of the next 3 or 4 years?

Let's go back to 2008, or let's say a 5-year timeline, are we getting better or not.

I'm concerned about how long this is taking, as well as how much this is--how much it costs.

I think we all agree collaborations should be encouraged, but I strongly believe more needs to be done to protect the collaboratives from this handful of fringe obstructionists who repeatedly sue and upend the hard work.

the bill we are debating today is an important step forward in helping to combat addiction and opioid abuse. According to the Department of Veterans Affairs, 20 percent of veterans with PTSD also have a substance abuse disorder. Let me…

It is important that the FDA remains focused on its mission to helping ensure the United States has a safe food supply and abstains from marketing or labeling mandates that would have no bearing on food safety.

I do believe the USDA's priority should be with making determinations based on sound science regarding the safety of biotech products within its jurisdiction, not on marketing or mandatory labeling efforts that really have no bearing on…

I think to be clear, a decision to implement mandatory labeling would then not be based on safety concerns or sound science, but on other factors?

It's regulations and uncertainty. That's the one-two punch.

I view biotech as essential to the future of our food supply.

Many of these businesses only have a handful of employees and do not have armies of lawyers to wade through the thousands of pages of regulations.