Pat Toomey

My view is that the medical device tax is not only onerous in its scale, but it is bad in its design.

Yet, here we have an excise tax that stifles the development of new products that improve the quality of life for Americans.

I am very hopeful that we will, in this Congress, be able to repeal the medical device tax.

I think that was a big part of the rationale, this notion that you were going to get a big windfall.

But the medical device tax does not create jobs or grow the economy.

It is more than time that Congress took up this legislation, passed a bill on a bipartisan basis, delivered it to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, and, if necessary, was prepared to override a presidential veto.

I am very hopeful that we will, in this Congress, be able to repeal the Medical Device Tax.

The medical device industry is a huge economic contributor, not just in my state of Pennsylvania, but across the country.

My strong preference would be to have a full and permanent and complete repeal of the medical device tax

I want to thank Chairman Hatch for his cooperation in this effort.

I am concerned about the impact that is has on innovation in the medical device industry.

I want to thank both of you for holding this important hearing highlighting the negative impact the medical device tax is having on American jobs, innovation and patients.

Is it your view that a working-class family benefits from the availability of an affordable choice of whatever the product might be that might originate overseas?

Yes. We are a very large manufacturing State. If we can manufacture more and sell more overseas, I think that follows.

If TPA is passed, and subsequent to that we can pass TPP, is it your view that Pennsylvania farmers will export more products than they otherwise would?

FSOC's 2014 annual report notes that the Council is charged with promoting market discipline by eliminating the expectation of bailouts in the event of a failure of a large financial company.

Wouldn't it be better to apply 'modified' treatment of the LCR, or other rules, to banks of similar operational activities or risk profiles, even if their sizes differ substantially?

I would just urge you to consider the impact of savers losing their purchasing power.

The crisis has been over for a long time. And it is not as though there is no price to be paid by having this unbelievably accommodative policy.

I not only want to thank you for holding this hearing but I also want to take the opportunity to thank the panel of regulators for agreeing to appear before the Committee.

Our offices are frequented by small banks and credit unions who are struggling under a regulatory regime that hasn't been 'right-sized' for them.

While I am very frustrated with the current regulatory framework for our community financial institutions, I am encouraged by our regulators' willingness to appear today and address some of these issues head-on.

I think it is a very constructive proposal.

I was shocked by the amount of regulation that that bank was subject to then, and that was before Dodd-Frank.

We will not be successful this Congress in providing regulatory relief if our proposals do not have broad bipartisan agreement.