In the middle 1980s, Democrats and Ronald Reagan got together. They got together on taxes, cut taxes, kept progressivity, and grew the economy.

There are so many things that cut across the aisle that both sides would agree we do not need five educational subsidies.

Is there any reason why the principles of tax reform that were pursued in 1986 would not be once again an engine for job growth?

I admit that I think the structural issue ought to be tax reform.

We should not start in a place that is going to further distort the code.

I just think this is a big issue that does not get talked about much.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank all three of your organizations.

What the whole exercise is about is creating incentives for this economic renaissance that this country wants so much at this time.

I agree with your conclusion. I think tax reform, lowering the rate, broadening the base, is good for the economy.

I think the Europeans ought to do more to defend themselves in the future.

I do not think that we want to concede China or Asia or Europe or any of these other emerging markets to our foreign competitors.

I want U.S. companies to be as competitive as possible in this global economy.

I would much prefer to have the whole 10,000 here, personally.

I think that would have enormous benefits for the economy in a number of respects.

the big idea for economic growth in our country is fundamental tax reform, where you go in there and clean out this job-killing, thoroughly discredited mess

I think it would be possible to again build a bipartisan coalition for Build America Bonds if we get them to focus only on transportation.

I want red, white, and blue jobs.

I am very interested in seeing the corporate rate cut considerably and have proposed cutting it from 35 to 24.

There is today such a connection between the individual portions of the code and the corporate portions of the code.

What is going to be our challenge in the Administration?

To drive the deficit down dramatically, we need more economic growth.

when you are talking about long-term economic growth, you want a different tax model than what the Congress passed in December

What I want to do is make sure that as part of this debate we see that to really drive the deficit down, you have to do some serious growing.

What is your response to my concern that there is going to be a double standard with respect to measuring inefficiency?

I think the American people have a sense right now-- don't you, Mr. Chairman?--that they want us to do something now.