Patrick Leahy

I worry that we are robbing Peter to pay Paul.

We have got to find a way to get both into the budget.

I must say, Kit, as I've told you before, it was very helpful to have someone beside me who was a former Governor because you brought a perspective which was very, very helpful.

The citizen-soldiers and airmen of your National Guard are adding value to America every day that they serve.

We urge you to reconsider the C-130 Force Structure changes and seriously review alternative courses of action that will preserve our mobility capability for both of the Air National Guard's Federal and State missions.

As to the distribution of Milcon, certainly if I were in a Guard or Reserve unit, I'd feel as though I wasn't getting what I needed, and we have to admit that.

They say, 'We can't get a straight answer.'

I am concerned about some who have slipped through the cracks.

I worry about the way this is set up, that we are seeing a shift from rural to urban.

Vermont and other rural States rely on these programs to build affordable housing for low-income, elderly, and disabled residents.

I must admit, and as Senator Bond knows, when somebody corners you in the grocery store and they have got a concern, they have got a concern.

I think we all know the societal value of home ownership and community value and everything else, to say nothing about the economic well-being of the country.

I could support an appropriation that did that.

I worry about this because as I look at the budget, I am afraid there is a shift of priorities from rural areas, rural America to urban areas.

But why would Congress have the authority to suppress the free speech rights of one corporation when another corporation has a complete right to express their views to advocate for and against a candidate in an election?

The Court showed a remarkable ignorance of how campaign money can affect legislative decisions.

Why in the world couldn't they--if they adopted the corporate model of doing business, why couldn't they advocate for or against candidates who supported or failed to support their agenda of dealing with the tragedy of homelessness?

What is perhaps most disturbing is that the Court made these pronouncements without allowing any opportunity at all for a factual record to be developed.

I really think the carve-out that was created in the McCain-Feingold legislation in 2002 demonstrates the weakness of the argument that corporations somehow do not have free speech of First Amendment rights.

Thank you very much, Professor Rosen.

I absolutely believe that this is not the kind of open-and-shut question people say.

I think the rights of Vermonters and all Americans to speak to each other and to be heard should not be undercut by corporate spending.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant, electric light the best policeman.

The Citizens United decision was a tragic mistake.

This is not consistent with the general sensitivity of the Court to the views of the American people.