David McKinley

What I am more, equally as concerned about are people in rural America that this cost that you are imposing on us is going to be passed on to the consumer.

We know that 23 percent of the weight of a car has been reduced over the numbers of years. That has increased the number of rollovers and increased the number of deaths.

I think we all realize that through the CAFE standards it is going to have virtually no impact on the global climate change.

I appreciate it. I hope that we can do something, because at $10,000 a year that is after taxes...

I don't think there is an incentive for the regulators to hold that down.

We have the seventh highest premium rate in the country.

We are still waiting for that call about it, because we only have one exchange in the state.

I think I am going to address my remarks primarily to Mr. Slavitt, if I could, please.

This past year we had a 24 percent hike in our premiums and now they are--excuse me.

My hat is off to Pat Ford and the whole group up there but they have got to get it finished.

Why should we be waiting 20 years before something happens with it or 54 years before something begins?

I think it has a stigma and an effect on other development around it.

There are two-thirds of the sites that have been designated, nothing has been done with it.

I don't think there is any question that people that are getting health care and medical benefits that that is a good thing for them, but how do we get there?

He said it 22 times. I have no authority to deal with this immigration issue, but then he just went ahead and did it.

I feel in many respects like a fish out of water on this.

But States with natural gas are also into recession.

So, to me, it comes across more as just an effort to have bigger, broader, stronger, more intrusive Government as compared to really helping people and their economy.

She said it's about global leadership and I think wow, that was--that was a jaw-dropping revelation that she came out--this is not about the environment.

It doesn't surprise me at all that now the EPA is pivoting from the fact that jobs weren't created that there's no temperature increase.

I think we're picking winners and losers because I don't see one and a half jobs being created for the hundreds of billions of dollars that have been spent.

It's my understanding that this hearing was to examine the effects of major regulations on the energy and the industrial sectors.

I think we have a unique situation with a small refinery that is being penalized because they are producing far more diesel than gasoline.

But the EPA imposes the same proportional RIN obligation on all refiners, even some that produce significantly more diesel than gasoline.

They emphasized kind of some global organizing, collaborative or campaign. How could we go about such an effort?