Gerry Connolly

I think there's bipartisan, a lot of bipartisan agreement on this Committee about a problem, obviously, at Secret Service.

Well, it would be a direct challenge of your leadership.

If there are holes in the inspection regime I don't see how you are going to get any confidence in the agreement.

A lot of people are very concerned about that, that it is almost an open invitation to a future Iranian Government to proceed.

But when a foreign leader insults him, that should not be fair game and that should never be apologized away.

I think there are five issues that have to be addressed and that the administration is going to have to convince us you have addressed efficaciously to the best of your ability to our satisfaction.

Friends don't act that way, and I would say to my friend, Mr. Chabot from Ohio, it would come as news to Shimon Peres.

A foreign leader has insulted the head of state of the United States Government.

I find that a little ironic when so many of my friends have bashed the IRS for mistakes, for incompetence and for getting it wrong.

I certainly stand ready to hear the testimony today and hear the facts, but I must confess at the beginning, I wonder what the problem we are trying to solve is.

I would be interested in working with my colleagues to explore whether we can double down on those proven programs that, in fact, do work.

Make no mistake, the unfair effort by some to target all Federal employees as tax scoff offs has nothing to do with improving our Nation's tax compliance rate or lowering the deficit.

The Majority's longstanding obsession with advancing legislation that mandates firing Federal workers who have fallen behind in their taxes seems to me a classic example of the solution in search of a problem.

There is absolutely no disagreement among members here on this dais... that all Americans should pay their fair taxes in full and on time.

Even if you wanted to take corrective measures, you are not privy to that information, is that correct?

What do you think the purpose of that provision was?

Is it unusual for an independent agency such as yours to communicate with the executive branch?

We have had trade deficits every year from Mexico. This past year 2014 there was a $99 billion, a nearly $100 billion trade deficit with Mexico.

It has never happened in this country before. That translates, using 5,000 jobs per billion, into a loss of 47,500,000 jobs.

The average worker has lost $7,000 a year in wages, and what families are facing is extraordinarily difficult.

The AFL-CIO has not taken a position for or against the TPP.

Well, he is also the leader of the country. He is your President as well as mine.

If that critique conceded, if that is true, then why would anybody have confidence in the argument, well, this time we got it right, trust us.

There is no reward whatsoever coming out of your organization and Mr. Donohue, and so we vote for free trade at our peril.

I couldn't possibly trust the Chamber, politically or substantively, to take that issue Ms. Drake has just given us as seriously.