But I also think it is irresponsible for us not to show how we would replace the sequester if we don't think it should--the formula should be impacted as it is.

I think it would be wise for the Commander in Chief to at least have a plan B, knowing that his budget isn't going to pass.

It seems like breaking an agreement.

The 2013 sequester is a $109 billion across-the-board, inflexible, and arbitrary cut in spending that will occur under current law on January 2, 2013.

The sequester will take effect, and we will see abrupt and indiscriminate cuts in government spending, unless we act.

I do not believe this is in the national interest, and the President claims that he agrees.

The only way to avoid these dire results is for Congress to pass and the President to sign new legislation.

Building Keystone XL would not of itself have any significant impact on U.S. total crude runs, total crude and product import levels, or costs.

Last week, President Obama accused republicans of being 'social Darwinists.'

We face the most predictable debt crisis in history, and if this crisis hits those who rely on the safety net the most will be hurt the first and the worst.

As part of the House Budget, we propose to replace the sequester with reforms to ensure that we get the deficit reduction we all want