Patrick Leahy

So your department supports naloxone?

We have introduced it for reauthorization. It is going to be coming before the Senate Judiciary Committee very soon.

We have to be in it together.

This is not a political issue. This is our children. These are our family members.

We spent 42 trillion in Iraq, and he was wondering, you know, that money might have been spent in other places.

And I agree, and they are important. And it is also important to not fight over the quarters but rather fight for a result.

I guarantee you, every one of you has a Rutland in your State, but have they come together?

Without the funding secured by Senator Leahy over the years--and it does go back decades--our ability to operate the Drug Task Force at the level of success it enjoys today would not be possible.

They did get it wrong.

We have to have realistic discussions of the issues communities face from opiate and other substance abuse...

I have never seen in my lifetime in this State a law enforcement community more fully committed to prevention and treatment efforts as we have right now.

Thank you for your unwavering support of the city of Rutland. It is appreciated by all of us who are working tirelessly to get this right.

Under your leadership, Senator Leahy, this Judiciary Committee has held three field hearings in Vermont on the issue of drugs in recent years, including opiates.

We have to get ahead of addiction. We cannot let it corrode our lives and our communities.

I have joined with some of the most conservative Republicans in the Senate as well as some of the most liberal Democrats, and we have been effectively able to get legislation through.

You cannot arrest your way out of this problem.

I would note for the record, because this will be a part of the permanent record of the U.S. Senate, that at least half the hands in the room went up.

Around the same time under your leadership, Senator Leahy, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee held a field hearing in this very room.

Not on our streets, not in our town.

Its purpose was to influence political conditions abroad by gathering information about Cuban cell phone users to encourage opposition to the Cuban Government.

We have spent millions of dollars, for example, on the Marti program even though we just made a lot of people wealthy, but it has not done much of any good whatsoever, but it makes people feel good to spend the money.

So the Helms-Burton Act would make sure that, to show how tough we are, we could not help Cuban children who have health needs.

I completely agree with your concept that we have got to make it possible for the people in the area to do things, to be able to help themselves.

I have seen some nice press releases, but I have not seen any steps that would actually get him out.

I wonder to what extent significant experience in overseas development is a requirement for working at USAID?