U.S. Rep. Bob Gibbs, R-Lakeville
"House Republicans have passed two separate bills to replace the sequester with responsible cuts that equal or exceed the sequester cuts. Unfortunately, the Democrat-controlled Senate did not bring either piece of legislation to the floor. The Senate and President have not put forth details of their cuts to reduce our nation's outrageous spending habits.
“One of the major problems we are facing is the fact that a large portion of the budget is currently exempt from any cuts. We must put in place common-sense reforms to these programs that allow for responsible cuts that do not result in the Department of Defense absorbing a disproportionate share of the cuts.
“The President is resisting the major changes that this country needs in order to reduce our spending addiction. Obama’s proposed cuts do not meet the clear goal of putting an end to the squandering away of Americans’ hard-earned tax dollars. It is my sincere hope that we are able to develop a plan to replace President Obama's sequester that makes responsible cuts and moves us towards a balanced budget."
U.S. Rep. Jim Renacci, R-Wadsworth
“To date, President Obama has not offered a credible plan to prevent the ‘sequester,’ an idea his Administration created to make deep, across-the-board spending cuts. House Republicans believe the sequester is not the right way to cut spending. That is why we have twice passed legislation – once in May and again in December – that would replace those scattershot cuts with ones that are more targeted and help reform the way the federal government spends our tax dollars going forward. If the President is looking for a way to avoid the sequester, he need look no further than our plan because it is the only proposal that has passed in either chamber of Congress.”
U.S. Rep. Tim Ryan, D-Niles — His office did not issue a statement as to the effect of the sequester on the 13th District, but it did address the sequester’s possible cut of his congressional office budget.
"My office has prepared for a sequester during the past year by eliminating pay raises, not filling job vacancies, reducing travel, dispensing with printed and mailed newsletters, not renewing expensive subscriptions, eliminating telephone townhalls and townhall advertising. I have attempted to achieve these savings while at the same time maintaining an effective constituent communication and casework operation."
U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Avon
"Although we have to make cuts, they must be done in a responsible way that does not threaten our national security or disproportionately burden those who serve our nation—whether it’s in uniform or in the classroom.
“Senate Democrats have chosen a responsible, balanced approach that would avoid sequestrations’ drastic cuts. That’s why I am supportive of the plan that includes a mix of spending cuts and increased revenue that would allow our first responders and teachers to keep their jobs; would not result in slashes to Medicare; and will maintain the strength of our national defense and military preparedness.”
Page 2 of 2 - U.S. Sen. Rob Portman, R-Cincinnati
“The President’s sequester, $85 billion in across-the-board spending cuts over the next 7 months, would have a detrimental effect on our national defense and the federal government’s vital operations. But given the fact that Washington has run deficits of nearly the same amount every month over the past year, everyone agrees we can find the savings. That’s why I would like to give the Administration the flexibility to target the spending cuts so as not to blindly gut the military and hamper operations.”
Compiled by Robert Wang