Jerry Nadler

The Committee has engaged in a relentless, unfounded, grossly unfair attack on the leadership and integrity of Assistant Attorney General Tom Perez

This inconsistency on the part of my Republican colleagues should not distract us from legitimate questions worthy of congressional oversight

It is certainly a legitimate government purpose, whether you agree with it or not, to avoid taking something to the Supreme Court

If Mr. King will not take back his words referring to the Assistant Attorney General as a dishonorable man, I think his words ought to be taken down.

The travesty is what has been done to Mr. Newell.

I have never seen in a committee of this House before where you had the one side's witnesses on one panel and the other witness on a subsequent panel.

This is a shameful smear campaign against Mr. Perez, and went on, and the gentleman from Maryland said that he is one of the most honorable men I know.

It is unfortunate that our committee's majority did not follow Senator Harkin's lead.

The decision against intervention in the Newell case by the Civil Division's top False Claims Act lawyers was the right choice.

But let's not pretend that these disagreements have any legitimate ethical or professional responsibility basis.

The entire purpose of this hearing is to attack the leadership and reputation of one of this Nation's best public servants, Tom Perez.

I think he expressed in the most eloquent way the devastating and lasting impact that crime, especially crimes of such unspeakable violence and cruelty, has on its victims.

We could provide more funding for crime victims' programs.

It is especially suitable that we are discussing these vital issues during National Crime Victims Week.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.

We have to figure out how to cut down on the red tape and on the delays in implementing projects.

The gas tax, the gasoline tax, which has been the--or the diesel fuel tax, which has been the primary source of financing for infrastructure, has been--is a wasting asset.

This is the beginning of what will hopefully be a very fruitful investigation into a--that may result in a unified, intelligent, comprehensive freight policy for this country.

Freight projects face significant barriers in securing funding under Federal-aid Highway Programs.

But this is very important. This is how it would normally operate.

The point is, the existence of this statute on the books would put a cloud, like a cloud of title, like a cloud on title, here being a cloud on future revenue.

The penalties in this bill are so draconian and misguided that even a government that never took a prohibited action would be hobbled financially by it.

I think it is a very misguided clause. I think all it will do is enable states to be sued.

Since the Kelo decision, there have been new developments that call into question whether Congress should even act at this point.

I continue to believe that this bill is the wrong approach to a very serious issue.