Rob Portman Quotes

It certainly makes no sense to enact more laws if we cannot, or do not, enforce the ones we have.

Regulatory enforcement mechanisms need to be sure and they need to be swift.

Laws are generally not understood by three sorts of persons, viz, by those who make them, by those who execute them, and by those who suffer if they break them.

A fair question could be posed in this fashion: If people are not obeying existing laws, what makes us think they would obey any new laws?

Do not have any doubt that I will apply the law over whoever is responsible for not complying with the law.

This law will be impossible to enforce. It will produce contempt for our laws and law enforcement.

People are unwilling to enforce the laws on the books. Instead, they make more laws. Why can't we get this right?

Keep under strict surveillance and control those secret establishments which, within your government structures, seem to regard themselves as above the law.

There's a simple way to solve the crime problem: obey the law; punish those who do not.

To make crime unprofitable, let the government run it.

The American people likewise want to see enforcement first, no tricks, no triggers, no amnesty, enforcing existing laws and closing loopholes to reaffirm that our great Republic is, in fact, a nation of laws.

At the heart of these challenges lies the question of how the institutions of the European Union make laws, the types of laws they pass and the effectiveness with which those laws are implemented on civil society and the economy.

All issues of crime are better addressed at the state level.

If we want corporations to act differently, we have to force them to do so through laws that are fully enforced and through penalties higher than the economic benefits of thwarting the laws.

He exists and we have four people who identified him and I know who he is, where he is, what his phone number is, everything about him that one needs. All I need is a criminal trial so I can have him subpoenaed.

This is going right to the police. So, it's a very dangerous precedent.

I've always thought if we don't want to enforce laws on the books, we should remove them from the books. But when you have laws, you breed contempt if you don't enforce them.

How accurately can the law fix the crime? There has to be a mechanism for very fast action. The law is like this: catch them and punish them.

If our government has a policy, any political subdivision, that limits or restricts the enforcement of our immigration laws, we will sue them! And that suit will be $5,000 a day every day until that policy is changed! This law will be enforced.

The steps which my predecessor took and the legislation passed on his recommendation have accomplished much, have caused a general halt in the vicious policies which created popular alarm, and have brought about in the business world a much higher regard for existing law.

Without very draconian penalties it would be very difficult to flip someone and control organized crime.

Society, by setting forth clear penalties for certain kinds of conduct sets its public ratification on moral judgments that this is wrong behavior and that it is deserving of punishment irrespective of whether the punishment will deter, rehabilitate or anything else. It is a way of society of defining what is wrong and what is seriously wrong.

It is absolutely essential that bank supervisory bodies have the enforcement tools, the independence, and the political support to take tough enforcement measures when they are needed. Everything else—more uniform accounting standards, improved disclosure, and risk-based supervision—will count for little if supervisors lack effective powers of enforcement and the will to use them.

Incarceration begets more incarceration, and incarceration also begets more crime, which in turn invites more aggressive enforcement, which then re-supplies incarceration …

You can't keep fraud out of the system. The key to good regulation is how quickly you catch it.