Frank Pallone

For most of us, broadband has become an essential part of our day-to-day lives.

By continuing these twin efforts to improve network infrastructure and to free more spectrum, I believe we can meet consumers' communications needs for years to come.

The best way to build a sound infrastructure is to ensure that both industry and the government are working together.

Our priority should never be whether to invest in infrastructure; it should be only how we invest.

I will keep my remarks short because I think there are some other Members who would like to use my time.

I believe that if you are looking at the whole Internet ecosystem, there is no doubt that there is a huge benefit from network neutrality.

I am troubled by the assertions from critics of the rules that allege that the FCC net neutrality or even healthcare regulations will harm investment.

One of the reasons I support net--strong net neutrality is because I want to ensure that small businesses have an equal playing field.

I support strong net neutrality rules because they will protect consumers, and consumers now have guaranteed access to the content that they want without intervention from the provider.

The FCC's net neutrality rule will keep us moving forward, empowering consumers and businesses as technologies change and advance, benefiting the economy as a whole.

When the FCC adopted its net neutrality rules earlier this year, consumers won, innovation won, and the economy won.

I remain a strong supporter of net neutrality, and I believe that the rules the FCC adopted have already benefited consumers.

We hope we get a big vote from the Republican side.

If we value toxic waste clean ups, drinking water infrastructure, and other EPA initiatives that protect human health, the environment, and the economy, we should ensure sufficient funding.

It just seems to me that Republicans in the House want to cut funding every year and then they complain that the EPA is falling behind.

I support the e-Manifest program. I think it should be funded.

Funding for brownfields grants was $35 million below the President's request. Funding for Superfund cleanup was $65 million below the President's request. Funding for the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund was $429 million below the…

These issues are important to the American people, to public health, to the environment, and to the economy.

This hearing is one more in a long line of hearings that focus on small issues while large and pressing issues remain unexamined and unaddressed.

As I said, now our vice chair of the committee also is going into all the reasons why we should repeal the Affordable Care Act. So I think maybe at this time, Mr. Chairman, I would like to just read, if I could, from the Statement of…

It doesn't have any merit in my opinion, Mr. Bagdoyan. I am shocked.

I just think that it is important when--it just disturbs me a great deal to think that what you are basically telling me is that anything Congress asks you to do, no matter how spurious it might be, no matter whether or not you think it is…

So it is always a question of priorities.

It just seems to me that it is not a priority.

I just feel that it is very important for people to get health insurance.