Steve Womack

I find it incredible that anybody associated with the Federal Government would be in the presence of a retailer selling a lawful product...

Mr. Chairman, how would you call that anything but intimidation? You are the heavy hand of government standing in a retailer's office basically intimidating them to the point where they stop selling a product that is on their shelves. How…

I concur with the chairman, and I have an enormous amount of respect for the ranking member.

Now, when you look at where we have come from, the $10 trillion to $20 trillion, that is a huge deficit increase--or huge debt increase, and no one gets a pat on the back for that.

But your attempts to sugarcoat this budget and its projections for the future on behalf of the administration that I know you work for is just a sad abdication of responsibility for the challenges we are facing as a country.

I know that the President wants to raise a lot of taxes. What I find incomprehensible as a Member of Congress...

I am glad you mentioned health care, because I agree with you that it is the principal driver of the deficits and the debt.

How can you sit here with a straight face and tell this committee... that this President has done anything but lead?

Even with tax increases, it balloons to more than $700 billion a year.

So only in Washington and only from the Office of Management and Budget could we see the gross Federal debt go from $19 trillion today to... even with $3 trillion worth of tax increases, $26 trillion in the 10-year window.

In all fairness to the IRS, and I know it is hard to believe I would say that, but it is really the legislation, the big soup that was created in the legislation, that put the IRS in a very difficult position.

We are in a business where the more people we can put into our restaurants, the better we can perform.

We have spent the last several years looking at how we were going to report.

We have about 200 employees right now.

It was clear to me then that the promises of the ACA were in conflict with each other--expanding coverage, improving health care, while lowering cost--but, sadly, it is clear to me now that the law has not delivered.

It is always great to have you here. Always look forward to your testimony.

We need to be careful, that the message that we are sending is anything but that which would become a combat multiplier.

I have to tell you, that hurts to hear it referred to--to me, a slush fund is something that would be used to spend money unnecessarily or wastefully.

A number of us just returned from the Ukraine, and so I have got a question about what is going on in eastern Europe.

The threat is moving forward rapidly and progressing at an equal pace.

Seems to me that over time, we hear all of these time frames, in 6 months, in 1 year, and this has been going on multiple years, so forgive me for being a bit skeptical about some of this.

What concerns should we have about what our capability is in the eastern part of Europe given what is going on in the Ukraine and the potential for Russia to step up more of this aggressive nature that they seem to be playing?

If our goal is to convince the American public that we are going to achieve some kind of fiscal sanity...only on the discretionary side of the budget, the public is going to be terribly misled.

I am a big believer that the sequestration is a mindless approach, a lazy man's way to effect some kind of budgeting outcome.

I don't have a real good, warm and fuzzy feeling on this particular project.