Jim Bridenstine

I wanted to bring up a couple of things that I want to make sure people understand my philosophy on.

These federal plans will have huge implementation costs, hurting consumers, those on fixed incomes, and small businesses.

As the Obama Administration nears the end of its time in office, we must carefully review the impact, costs, and achievability of any rules and implementation plans this activist EPA attempts to put in place on the way out the door.

The scientific justification for this regulation is shaky and questionable.

The EPA has overruled the plans created by many states to comply with this rule, instituting Federal Implementation Plans in 14 states.

The benefits of this regulation are dubious but the costs to individual states, including my home state of Oklahoma, will be very, very high.

That is absolutely bullying states.

The EPA is using 'visibility improvement' to force utilities and other stakeholders to further move away from coal.

I've heard from countless weather and data experts that World Meteorological Organization Resolution 40, WMO 40, does not require the release of all data to the world.

I think this Committee is not sufficiently balanced appropriately for a guy from Oklahoma.

This is bipartisan legislation which will statutorily compel NOAA to consider commercial data.

I disagree if this is the strategy.

This Committee has conducted several years of oversight on various weather data sources and technologies.

I look forward to discussing that more during my questions.

This pilot program is an important signal to the private sector that NOAA is interested in new and innovative sources of data.

A properly staffed and funded office where the private sector can engage with NOAA is a vital component in a changing forecasting paradigm.

I am encouraged to see that NOAA has begun to utilize the growing opportunities that can bring a paradigm shift to the weather prediction landscape.

As a Representative from Oklahoma, a state hit regularly with severe weather, it is my responsibility to my constituents to promote policies that improve our forecasting abilities in order to save lives and property.

I think we should have our own sticker that says 2032.

Those who say we can't are just putting their priorities elsewhere.

When the Constellation program was cancelled in 2010, some people said, 'why go back to the moon? We've already been there.'

I support that mission. And I sincerely hope that that first person is an American.

Under Cruz, we can be assured that we have the strongest military in the world.

Cruz was there to do his job and voted to fund our troops.

Cruz had substantive objections to some of provisions in the acts, not to their funding levels.