I'm pleased the administration is endorsing the need for legislation dealing with the chemical sector. In the past, the administration's position has been ambiguous.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
Personally, I think that for example the chemical directive in its present form does too much damage to the chemical industry - especially the medium sized businesses - and will hurt our worldwide competitiveness.
It is time to end the discrimination against people who need treatment for chemical addiction. It is time for Congress to deal with our Nation's number one public health problem.
I feel badly for the people who suffer from the side effects and consequences of hazardous pharmaceuticals. It's antithetical to the Hippocratic oath.
I'm angry that the private sector, which is supposed to be in charge of running gasoline into the Valley, doesn't have its act together to deal with a critical situation, so now the public sector has to step in.
We're one of the most highly regulated industries, and we have to pay attention to what government is doing.
I take very seriously my responsibility as Secretary-General to make sure that the United Nations is doing everything it can to uphold the universal prohibition on the use of chemical weapons.
I hope the EPA will listen to the many votes over the years in Congress opposing cap-and-trade and rescind that proposed rule.
The government has a key role in regulating and making sure there's an even playing field and protecting consumers. No question about it.
I believe that the topic of chemical weapons is critically important for international peace and security, and I take note of the ongoing debate over what course of action should be taken by the international community. All those actions should be taken within the framework of the U.N. Charter, as a matter of principle.
The vast amount of waste and sheer stupidity in government - from the Pentagon to the Food and Drug Administration - could fill committee agendas for years.
No opposing quotes found.