Tom Coburn

I think this has been one of the best.

I see something I've never seen in my 62 years of life: an absolute fear that we're losing it.

When we ignore the idea that the problem with illegal immigration isn't illegal immigration, it's the very fact that somebody is violating a law.

It ought to go for individual freedom, individual liberty when it's--when it's on the narrow.

We ought to be trying to build that confidence and to reassure the American public that we actually get it.

There's a disconnect. And it's seen--that's why we see the unrest, the tension that's out there in the electorate.

We do not have the cooperation of the Chinese government.

Do we have the cooperation of China now in enforcement of our intellectual properties?

One of the reasons we are suffering a lack of jobs is tens of billions of dollars in productivity and jobs that should be in this country have been stolen by those that violate international intellectual property rights, chief of which is…

They are stealing our intellectual property. They are stealing our future today.

After passage of legislation that was trumpeted everywhere that from now on we were going to pay for additional spending, how could that happen?

To suggest to anyone that you can outlaw the use of foreign or international law is a sentiment that is based on a fundamental misunderstanding. What you would be asking American judges is to close their minds to good ideas. Nothing in the…

The reduction is in overhead expense; it is not in labor. The definition the Senator is using is an across-the-board cut. That is not in this amendment at all. Does the chairman realize that the 5-percent reduction is in overhead--not…

This bill is kind of like that. It is kind of like a doctor treating symptoms instead of the real disease. The real disease was Congress. The real disease was poor underwriting standards, actually no underwriting standards. The real…

The tone set by that, if I worked for Goldman Sachs, I would be real worried that somebody has made a decision that he is going to be a whipping boy.

$700 billion got allocated of taxpayer money to solve systemic risk problems, of which you were the beneficiary both directly and indirectly of a portion of that.

No institution should be too big to fail or have to burden the public with the cost of its failure or being saved.

Do you have any thoughts on the fact that this bill doesn't address underlying core problems like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?

Their existing function is they take over and immediately sell the assets and they don't run things, correct?

The answer to that is absolutely no. Nobody is going to believe they have the capability to do that.

Systemic risk and the fact that it was there created the necessary program for us to eliminate that systemic risk.

I think 90 percent of the problems associated with the meltdown in our mortgage system and the financial crisis sits on the lap of Congress.

We are going to give a Federal bureaucracy the ability--who has never had any experience--to come in and run a company like Goldman Sachs

The option in the Dodd bill is to tax you so that we can have a fund, and I have real problems with how that fund is managed.

I don't think we have gotten there.