Ron Wyden

They are opposed, as I have indicated. I think it is particularly important to see this provider-patient partnership that this time is saying the patients come first and this bill hurts patients.

I can tell my colleagues that Senator Murray and I, the two of us--the ranking member on the Budget Committee and I--have actually made public the overwhelming opposition from providers on this. So, in effect, providers and patients are…

My colleague is being logical, and heaven forbid that logic should be introduced into this, because we would automatically assume that on a matter like this--we are talking about one-sixth of the American economy--the Senate Finance…

I would say to my colleague, the ranking member of the Budget Committee, that we are talking about one-sixth of the American economy.

I continue to be concerned about establishing a sweeping new policy that could raise serious questions about the protection for special places.

We have been working on an important piece of legislation called the RNR bill, the Recreation Not Red-Tape Act.

Maintaining and improving access to public lands is not just for this generation, but for the generations to come.

I am going to pull out all the stops until these fragile landscapes get the protection that they deserve.

Before he leaves the floor, I want to commend my colleague from Connecticut for a very thoughtful speech. I think he has made the case that the challenge ahead is really a two- part drill--first, to stop something that is especially ill…

It's the tale of two systems; one strict, compulsory system for the hard-working people... and another system for the lucky few.

If tax reform becomes a partisan exercise in slashing rates for the wealthy and the biggest corporations, the American people will see right through it.

In my view, the big challenge at the heart of tax reform is guaranteeing that everybody has a chance to get ahead--not just the fortunate few.

I believe that responsiveness to congressional requests for information is critically important and I am committed to providing appropriate, useful responses to all members of Congress.

It has to be bipartisan, and it has to focus on the middle class and ending this tale of two tax codes.

The reality is that you can probably find some opportunities to bully your way to a 51-vote strategy with reconciliation.

I think that is the clear reality. I do not know of any other place that you can go to drive the kind of growth that we want without zeroing in on the middle class.

He would have handled the matter of what happened at Ernst and Young differently.

This is a question of whether, in this job, you are going to have the political will to take on these powerful interests.

I think Congress makes its best decisions when both parties work together.

This was a big rip-off. And I would like to know what you would have done differently.

When you were director of national tax at Ernst and Young, you were responsible for tracking the amount of money employees in your department made for selling tax shelters that cost taxpayers billions of dollars.

I very much share Senator McCaskill's view on the importance of it being bipartisan.

It's hard to look at that evidence and find any proof that the majority party wants real Democratic involvement in tax reform.

In fact, independent analyses said millions of working Americans were in line for a tax increase under the Trump plan.

What's needed is bipartisan tax reform that focuses on progressivity, helping the middle class, cleaning out flagrant tax loopholes, fiscal responsibility, and giving everybody in America the chance to get ahead.