Pat Ryan

We have not seen that in a few years around here.

We are disappointed in this budget because it is a status quo budget. It does not break any new ground.

The President's budget is a disappointment--because it's a missed opportunity.

Even if we cannot agree on everything, we need to make a down payment on our debt and we need to make that down payment now.

Our plan balances the budget in 10 years to foster a healthier economy and to help create jobs.

We need a new approach in Washington to meet our country's most pressing needs.

Hardworking taxpayers deserve real solutions and we need to make our Tax Code simpler and fairer for every American.

I believe having certainty here would spur innovation and research in the private sector and in programs like Medicare.

But while the businesses in my district are doing their part and growing and creating jobs, the Federal Government seems more interested in putting up roadblocks to achievement than acting as a partner in ensuring their success.

This responsibility to our constituents is why I suggest adopting legislation requiring a pay cut should Congress fail to pass a budget that balances within 10 years.

One solution I have advocated for would be, over time gradually increasing the retirement age for both Social Security and Medicare to 72.

Unfortunately, while the Path to Prosperity passed the House two times, the Senate refused to work with us.

Business owners in my district know that today's deficit spending will have to be paid for with tomorrow's tax increases.

Since arriving to Congress I have twice supported Chairman Ryan's budgetary proposal, commonly referred to as the Path to Prosperity.

I advocate we adopt a zero-based budgeting process.

Balancing the budget should be the number one priority of every Congress, especially the 113th.

Failing to act to reform and therefore save these entitlement programs is irresponsible.

I cannot stress how opposed I am to this proposition.

As you might expect, Mr. McDermott, beneficiaries went to the doctor less often.

We want to make sure, as Susan said, that most of the money, 60 to 65 percent be used for training.

We had hearings from west coast to east coast and often times we found that 15 to 35 percent was all that was available for training.

Budget Committee chair Rep. Paul Ryan frequently uses consolidation as justification for cutting funding for WIA and other workforce programs in his proposed federal budgets.

I will write a letter to the Office of Management and Budget and ask them how much money would we save over the next 10 years if we were to eliminate the middlemen.

Cut that out. Find buildings that were paid for by taxpayers and let them use that for a board meeting room for the workforce board.

I believe, Madame Chair, that we should eliminate the middlemen again.