John Delaney Quotes

The issue isn't more or less government. It's dumb vs. smart government.

It is easy to scoff at the prestigious commissions that constantly sprout in Washington as empty exercises in buck passing—until you take stock of all they have accomplished.

The people of New Jersey sent me to Congress because they are tired of partisan gridlock. They want to see our Congress get to work on legislation that will make people's lives better.

We do not believe that if you cut back what government does you diminish its authority. On the contrary, a government that did less, and therefore did better, would strengthen its authority.

We should distinguish carefully skepticism about Big Government from contempt for all government.

I'd like to think I'm a serious legislator and trying to get things done.

Too many people in Washington care about power institutions, not caring about changing the lives of everyday Americans.

No matter where I go - London, Beirut, Jerusalem, Washington, Beijing, or Bangalore - I'm always looking to rediscover that land of ten thousand lakes where politics actually worked to make people's lives better, not pull them apart.

You elected government officials to make decisions and it's about time they started making good ones.

I believe that smaller government is better government. But I also believe that in the areas where government does play a legitimate role, we should demand that it is done better.

A state is better governed which has few laws, and those laws strictly observed.

We can't do without government, but we do need it to be more effective.

I've been around Congress long enough to know there are issues we may never see eye-to-eye from the opposite aisle, but we should all agree that our job is to move America forward and benefit the people.

My task as a citizen is to get the government to do more good and less inefficient and wasteful work.

I happened to have the privilege of serving in Congress. It will be 16 years at the end of this term. And I think I made a difference here on important issues.

We need to do a top/bottom review of the federal government and for every agency administration bureaucracy that is not called for in the United States Constitution, we have to really ask the question what is its purpose, how many people work there, how much does it cost the taxpayers and what is the value to our society.

If you're in favour of any policy - reform, revolution, stability, regression, whatever - if you're at least minimally moral, it's because you think it's somehow good for people. And good for people means conforming to their fundamental nature.

I'm not going to work so that Pena Nieto is the best known or most recognized in the world. I'm going to work so that Mexico has results.

I think the American people are looking for real leadership. That's what I've done in Louisiana, that's what I'll do in America.

For voters what matters is what government actually delivers for them.

I was elected to come to an incredibly dysfunctional capital and make the government work better, and that's what I'm doing.

There aren't many Presidents who have had an effect on the fundamental policies of the nation.

A legislator has thousands of issues he must decide. Five minutes of access to present your case is very valuable.

What succeeds best politically does not always do so policy wise and vice versa.

The question today is not whether the government is too small or too small, but whether or not it works