Byron Dorgan

We have had four events, really, that have been kind of defining events since we began much more enhanced screening after 9/11.

The bottom line is, we need to provide for the best possible security.

I don't want to give a roadmap to anybody to say, 'OK, here's exactly what the technique is.'

I would like to get from you an analysis, if you would, of the efficiency and effectiveness of the aviation side at this point.

What kind of protection have you developed so that someone who has had a reasonably explicit photograph taken of them through this full-body imaging--that it's not going to be moved around?

I hope that you--with all that's on your plate--will not try to change what is the law in this country.

It was more invasive than what I was used to.

There would be an upheaval in Congress, and there would be great efforts to prevent it from happening.

Should they feel there is slightly less risk, the same risk, or more risk?

We've got to start anticipating, through intelligence, what they're up to, before it happens.

Also we wanted to share our congratulations to Senator Dorgan, looking at the excellent job that he's done throughout the years.

He has been a great advocate for the Indian people and with his pending retirement from the Senate, please let him know that we will miss him.

I want to thank you for allowing me to make additional comments and also to share the written testimony.

We need your help in this area.

Even if those who believe this should be repealed--and I don't; that would be a profound mistake to repeal that law--even if they had enough votes to repeal it, they would not have enough votes to override a presidential veto.

If there were a repeal of the health care bill that was passed by the Congress, the Indian Health Care Improvement Act would similarly be repealed.

Everybody's always worried about rationing: It's going on in this country, every single day to American Indians.

So that's seven months out of the year, and then the next five months there's no money.

But let me ask you: If I might go to the 39-year-old mother of five--are you familiar with this case?

There is now a requirement for the Secretary of Health and Human Services to develop a plan by which Nevada would become its own IHS area.

It should be illegal to make people suffer like this.

Somehow, that suggests to me somebody's not thinking in this process.

I mean, you've got to set a broken wrist so it heals properly.

So that means it's not Priority 1, Life or Limb?

Why would you possibly approve a pacemaker if you don't intend to provide batteries for the pacemaker?