Peter Visclosky: “I appreciate that the gentleman, on any number of occasions during his discussion, talked about the uncertainty that we…”

“I appreciate that the gentleman, on any number of occasions during his discussion, talked about the uncertainty that we face in this country because of sequestration, and I couldn't agree with him more and would point out that the gentleman voted for the Budget Control Act that created sequestration that has now created the uncertainty that we face, which I find very regrettable. The gentleman, also, in his concluding remarks, indicated that we need to look to save money. I couldn't agree with him more. He also indicated, and I would accept it for the sake of our discussion here on the House floor, that some of these processes take 13 years. I think the gentleman makes my argument. If it takes 13 years, we ought to start today, so that that child who is born later this week has the benefit of these savings we both want before they get to high school. Why wait to save the American taxpayers money by potentially not considering a plan? I think we ought to be thoughtful here, and I oppose the gentleman's amendment. I yield back the balance of my time. The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wittman). The amendment was rejected. The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 40 printed in House Report 113-170. Amendment No. 41 Offered by Mr. Flores The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 41 printed in House Report 113-170.”