It seems to me that we need to do something to help those individuals now caught in this set of circumstances and yet do not have the wherewithal, certainly at the start where they are facing premium shock.

Which would be an enormous body blow to this economy that is already struggling to recover.

It seems to me to be a perverse incentive, you know, or disincentive.

Shouldn't we be looking at how we maybe work to offset some of that ratable loss in a way that still would be an enormous savings to the program but would incentivize mayors to say, OK, let me take this property off the ratable base?

The work that you are being asked to do, should you be confirmed, is of vital importance to the U.S. Government.

I'm going to support your nomination. That's not the issue.

I have real problems having American lives shed and having American treasure continuing to be shed.

I hope you look at it as a fiduciary to the American taxpayer, because right now I do not believe that we are being good fiduciaries to the American taxpayer.

I am one of those who remains hopeful, while at the same time concerned about the future of Latin America.

Sustained income inequality threatens to disenfranchise the many who are not sharing in these economic gains.

And the fact that President Funes signed Decree 56, which prohibited all forms of discrimination by the Government of El Salvador on the grounds of sexual orientation or identity, was that a motivating factor for you as well?

The President proclaimed in June 2011 the recognition of the rights of individuals of people who are gay and lesbian.