>> host: can you please talk about the spectrum, the big options have been put out until 2016. >> guest: yes, the incentive auction is a very complicated thing that has never been tried before. and so at the same time it's really complicated. so probably won't happen since 2016 and meanwhile we do have the option which is underway and the only thing that we know about it is that it has produced much higher dividends post matt were you surprised by the numbers? >> guest: i would say that the

numbers say two things about what is contrary to what some people thought were the conventional wisdom. one was that the need for and the demand for spectrum was not as great and we hear that often. we hear people say that there is no spectrum crisis and i think the value of what is being given suggested there is a tremendous need for this spectrum and then the other piece of conventional wisdom that i think is interesting to at least think about as we heard a lot about how certain spectrum is more valuable than others and it has to do with lower frequency spectrum's and higher frequency spectrum is an honestly there are circumstances where that is true. but in terms of the value of the spectrum, at least

superficially it suggests that this higher frequency spectrum is yielding much higher dividends than the last time the fcc auction off their spectrums. and so that does show that we shouldn't write off frequency and frequently higher broadband. >> host: is there any competition in the mobile world? >> i think that the mobile market is hard to talk about what it's tremendously competitive. this is a market where consumers have released four different providers they can choose from the vast majority of americans have as many as five providers and it's very easy to switch carriers and switcher service providers and there's constant upheaval in terms of changes in

the product and the handsets and in terms of the plans that are available and we see constant things that are being sold. i look at that and say that it's very hard for any objective person to western how competitive that marketed. >> host: hank hultquist. vice president of at&t. thank you. >> host: we are at las vegas for the ces. if you are interested in seeing more of our programming, go to c-span.org/"communicators."

>> c-span is brought to you as a public service by your local cable or satellite provider. >> today president obama unveils his budget request that the homeland security department. white house officials say that the focus will be on helping middle-class americans. we will have remarks at 11:45 a.m. eastern. and live at 12:45 p.m., shaun donovan and others discuss the president's budget request. and live at 1:30 p.m. pentagon officials and representatives from each branch of the military will old a series of meetings outlining the specifics of the defense budget request. that is light today beginning at 11:45 a.m. eastern here on c-span2. >> president obama paid tribute to chuck hagel on wednesday at a ceremony at fort myer, virginia. he announced his departure late

last year and here are the president's remarks. this is 30 minutes. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, before i begin, i would like to ask join me in recognizing the incredible group that is here they are quite something and simply the best at what they do, whatever they do to include putting on ceremonies like this and we thank you very much. [applause] [applause] mr. secretary, i could not help but thinking as the national anthem was playing i wouldn't even guess how many times you have heard that song played, but i hope that you know that today that it was played for use and i hope it provides an enduring and

special memory of your time in service with your country. mr. president, mr. vice president, secretary and mr. hagel, men and women of the armed forces, good afternoon it's an honor to be here with secretary chuck hagel for his service to our nation and what an incredible unremarkable career it has been. it began 40 years ago when they called in charles hagel and they said you have six months to get back in college were going to be drafted into the vietnam war. to which she replied well i tried college three colleges, actually, let's just say that it wasn't in the best interest of those academic institutions. so i think that the best thing for me was actually to go into the army. but frankly may not be the best thing for the army. so he recounted that himself in the oral history that is being

accumulated at this smithsonian for the vietnam war. so he volunteered on the spot just as his grandfather had done in world war i and his father in world war ii that same sense of responsibility and commitment and genuine sense of humility characterized his leadership as our secretary of defense. the ago roosevelt once said that i have enjoyed my life and my work because i thoroughly believe that that success, real success does not depend upon the position that you hold that how you carry yourself in that position. it's unquestionable then the chuck hagel's lifetime of service and every position is held with the very definition of success. moreover he will be the first to tell you that his service has been made possible by the love of his family and we thank you

for your service and sacrifice and understanding and tireless supporter. please give a round of applause to the chuck hagel family. [applause] [applause] >> on this day in history 55 years ago today, the dallas cowboys and the national football league. as a giants fan i consider this a day of great sadness. but this historical note is timely with the super bowl coming up in just a few days. many of you probably don't know that long before he volunteered to serve in the army secretary chuck hagel had aspirations to play football himself. not to dallas cowboys, of course, he wanted to play for the university of nebraska cornhuskers. sports can teach many valuable lessons and in that same grain, teddy roosevelt talked about the principle to follow is this. hit the line hard don't foul and don't shirk. but hit the line hard.

that is certainly the principle that secretary hagel learned in columbus nebraska. and how he had the line hard as the secretary of defense. he worked to ensure that their forces with everything that they needed in order to conduct their missions in afghanistan and around the globe. as new challenges emerged the russian aggression in the ukraine and the oval of iris he provided leadership in ensuring that the department can respond quickly. to keep the nation secure. his leadership did not stop there we who work in the defense of our nation are called to live uncommon lives. the secretary and i have been advocates within our government and within the american people for us delivering on the promise to keep faith with civilian

personnel and service members and families. and he is a devoted family man and an exemplary person. he is a man of character and the type of character that was someone who valued be tested in this and they have a right of service to the nation. it is simply as solid as steel. but the love of the country is even stronger and it still resides in his chest. a permanent reminder of the sacrifice. a 20-year-old charles timothy hagel made the decision to volunteer because there was a war going on in hell the responsibility to serve. but he also wanted to set a good example for his three younger brothers and reflecting on that position he said that my father had suddenly passed away and i just wasn't coming together a way that i should.

today that we can say that we have without question, he came together all right and i am certain that the world war ii be 25 tailgunner would agree. so we thank you for your leadership and example and i am proud to have served by your side. [applause] >> mr. president. chairman dempsey, everyone here not a lot you've done a pretty good job and chuck there is no one that i know -- and i mean

this sincerely ,-com-com ma we have been friends for a long time, there's no one i know who benefits a standard that president kennedy set out for our generation when he said our success or failure will be measured by the answer to for questions. were we truly men of kurdish and were we truly men of judgment and integrity? were we truly men of jet dedication. but it's a lot more than your physical kurdish but i admire but your moral cordage and political kurdish and you have more of that than about any one i have ever served with in all the years i have served. you are a man whose judgment counsel i have always sought at

times during that 12 years in the foreign relations committee many tens of thousands of miles we traveled around the world northern -- into northern iraq at a time that we went in and telling a quick story we wanted to go in and we couldn't figure out how to get there. this is before the war had commenced and so the turks decided to let us through and they decided to stick us in a car with a guy that looked like one of these modern-day road warrior movies and we're sitting in the backseat and essential item in the seat as often as you can because you don't want to be seen and i remember chuck sang

that i'm worried about my mom. we are writing through the mountains and the he has a cell phone, and he said call your mother, it's a pretty interesting thing and he never forgets what was important. and your integrity, chuck was something that everyone in the united states senate with whom we worked and everyone in the previous administration worked with and you always mean what you said, you said what you mean in my neighborhood and also yours a promise made is a promise kept and you cannot find anyone who's ever no new when you have ever not kept the commitment you made. with that dedication to this

country that goes without having even made reference to it. and chuck, your experience as a fellow warrior to all of your comrades here has established an unusual bond and i remember everyone was talking to generals and you are over climbing in a humvee with two surgeons asking them what is going on. what the problem is. and you are always, always walking away and talking to the rank-and-file members and they knew it and they understood it and they got the straight scoop. we have also known which i think is not unique to critically important, something that the president understands and has exemplified. that we not only provide an

example of our pallor but live by pallor of our example. and we understood to the cooler the power and prestige ultimately rests upon the men and women in the form assembled here today. and you feel as i do and all of us do we have a lot of obligations as a country. but we only have one truly sacred obligation. we have obligations to the needy and elderly and those that educate our children but we have one sacred obligation care for people that we sent to war and to care for their families when they come home from war. no one has been more committed to filling out obligation on you. so chuck, i'm personally going to miss you and your presence here and i am sure that no one

in this auditorium misunderstands the depth of the service, the sacrifices that you made and so chuck thank you for all you have done thank you for all you've done for me and all you have done for the country. i am proud to call you a friend and proud that you're the secretary of defense about to retire. in nebraska, it could've been the secretary of agriculture. >> i wish you all the very best. thank you. [applause] [applause]

[military processional] >> ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states. [applause] [applause] [militaryobama: good afternoon, everyone.

michelle and i just spent the past few days in india and i returned about 3:00 o'clock this morning. and so i don't know exactly what time it is. or what data is. but i was determined to be here with you this afternoon to honor and celebrate a great friend. to me and to all of us. in october 1967 lyndon johnson traveled to a military base to reveal a top-secret weapons program and he went down to the missile range and the testing grounds. they there in the desert, the president watched as his soldiers demonstrated what would later become the famed stinger

missile. one of those soldiers was a 21-year-old private from nebraska named charles timothy hagel. the secret service does not usually let me get too close to a weapons system. it makes them nervous. but clearly they did things a little bit differently back in the day of lbj. so chuck i can only assume you are careful not to point a missile at the president because what followed was a life of dedicated service to our nationspending nearly 50 years. vice president biden, members of congress general dempsey leaders from across the department and members of the joint chiefs of staff and service secretaries to the men and women of the greatest military of the world we gathered to pay tribute to a true american patriot. let me assure you that i checked with the secret service and

chuck will not be demonstrating any missile launches today. as we all know and we have heard again chuck loves nebraska. the cornhuskers, beer, other nebraska delicacies. as well as his fellow midwesterners. there just under 2 million people in nebraska. more than 7 billion people on the planet. but as so many of our troops have come out themselves, no matter where chuck goes in the world if you are from nebraska he will find you. and he will talk with you and he will listen to you and he will ask you about your family back home and chances are that he knows them as well. today is a celebration that is quintessentially american. a man from the heartland who has devoted his life to america. and just imagine in your mind's

eye the defining moments of his life, a kid from nebraska that has as marty said, volunteered to go to vietnam. a soldier outside saigon rushing to pull his brother from burning danger. and he stood up for his fellow vietnam vets who were exposed to agent orange. a senator that helped lead the fight for the post-9/11 g.i. bill. to give this generation of heroes the same opportunity that he had. and i asked chuck to lead his department had a moment of profound transition and today we express our gratitude for this under his watch for it after more than 13 years our combat mission in afghanistan is over and america's longest war has come to an honorable and responsible end. and because of chuck's direction

he has made difficult choices in a time of tight budgets and making sure that our forces are ready to be called on for any reason. today our troops are supporting afghan forces and continue to face risks in the pursuit of al qaeda networks and they remain relentless. they are leaving the coalition to destroy isil in part because chuck is strengthened the key partnerships in the middle east. and under his leadership our forces in west africa are helping to lead the global fight against the ebola virus, saving lives and showing american leadership at its very best. so even as we have met these challenges chuck has helped us to prepare for the century ahead and in europe, a stronger nato is reassuring our allies and in the asia pacific, one of my foreign-pforeign-p olicy priorities, chuck helps to modernize our alliances and

strengthen partnerships, oldster the defense and improve communications between the united states and chinese military, all of which have ensured that the united states have remained a strong power because chuck helped to build new trust, we will expand our defense cooperation as it has been demonstrated to the degree to which that partnership has moved in new directions and that is partly attributable to the work that he did. and the reforms that he launched will help make this more efficient and innovative for years to come. thank you to secretary chuck hagel's guiding hand that will benefit our future. but chuck i want to suggest that perhaps her greatest impact is a legacy that will be felt for decades to come has been your own example. it is not simply that you have

been the first listed combat veteran in the first vietnam veteran to serve as secretary of defense but hal or life experience, being down in the mud, feeling the bullets fly overhead. and how it has worked with no other secretary before you. you have made them feel at home and when you spoke to our newest sergeant majors about the true meaning of leadership and responsibility they knew they were leaving from their own. in those proud moments when you came to pen a purple heart on a wounded warrior you are not just there as a secretary of defense but in old army sergeant that knows the costs of war and the shrapnel in your chest. these are reflecting the driving force of chuck cable services and the love troops

and what has happened after 13 years of war. we are making progress we at have more women than ever before, we are making progress with sexual assault, we are bringing home remains of fallen heroes faster and more vietnam veterans will finally be eligible for the disability pay that they deserved all along. chuck, that is because of you. that is part of your legacy. and of course, i'm grateful to chuck on a personal level. exactly 10 years ago this month i joined you in the united states senate along with the vice president. i was new and you are a veteran legislator. i was the student and youth shared some lessons of service. i was young and you were not.

[laughter] and although we came from different parties, we often thought of things the same way including our conviction that even as we must never trained to defend our nation, we must never rushing to war. and we both believe that america should only send their sons and daughters into harm's way when it is absolutely necessary and when we do we make sure that they have everything they need to succeed and we have a mission that is worthy of their sacrifice. when it comes to politics, too often the sun is in the spectacle. you have always served with decency and dignity. and you have never lost your midwestern humility. and you have always been frank and honest and said what you thought. until i have so profoundly

better benefited. you represent national security and how we needed to bring that up today. joe biden reflects that i see dick lugar in the stands and he reflects that, that is when we are at our best. and sergeant, secretary, you have always been guided by what you believe is best for america and i thank you for your friendship and all of us thank you for your character. and of course, nobody serves alone. all of you, thank you for sharing your husband and father with us and for the sacrifices that your families make for all of ours. chuck, our lives are so often a

reflection of those closest to us and i also want to acknowledge the service of your brother tom and her brother charles and the sacrifices of your late mother betty, who worked day and night to raise her sons, we salute this american family. men and women in uniform here today, those% men and women in uniform here today, those who stand where chuck once stood they do not ask for much. they volunteered and they accept the risks that come with military service and they do ask this. to take care of them in this nation that they have taken care of us. we have asked them to meet the mission so we ask of them and after all that they have given for us and all that they have sacrificed they have the right to expect that we will meet our obligations as well. that is my duty as commander in

chief. .. the this is a different story. one day last year i was in the oval office, and checking in for what i thought would be our regular weekly meeting. but he had a guest, and he

introduced us. his name was jerome "skip" johnson, a friendly guy, a grandfather, and he was from my hometown of chicago. and chuck explained that skip lieutenant johnson, had been his platoon commander in vietnam. but they lost touch and tell chuck tracked him down. this was the first time they had reunited in nearly 50 years. chuck just wanted to bring skip to the oval office to say hello to the president, to meet his family, including his young grandsons. and chuck told me about how it'd been 1968, with protests and race riots back home causing tensions among our troops in vietnam. and checks unit was mostly white, but skip is african-american, and as the platoon commander he wasn't going to tolerate any division or distrust. he went to his men and made himself clear, we are all

americans. we are going to live together. we are going to take care of each other. we are fighting together. we're going to kick each others backs. let's get it done. at that moment in the oval office, as these two soldiers stood before me with skips grandsons looking on it wasn't lost on any of us how far our nation has come. and i want to thank chuck for that moment, because part of the reason we've travel that distance is we've had men like chuck hagel serving and representing what's best in america. in moments when we are tested, as a military as a nation, sometimes we get distracted by will what divides us and lose sight of what unites us. and that those moments we can draw strength from the example of a sergeant from nebraska and a lieutenant from chicago.

we are all americans. we live together. we sacrifice together. we take care of each other. sometimes we have to fight together. ladies and gentlemen, i want to introduce you to my friend, our 24th secretary of defense, and an outstanding american mr. chuck hagel. [applause] >> thank you.

[applause] >> that's about enough, enough. thank you. actually i think we can all go home now. mr. president thank you. i'm very grateful to you for many reasons. the first, thank you for being here today. i know the kind of schedule that you have been on and the length of the trip the intensity of those visits and to make this effort today means an awful lot. thank you. >> i want to also thank you for

giving me the honor of serving you and the american people as secretary of defense. i will always be grateful always grateful for that opportunity. and, mr. president, thank you for your strong leadership at a very difficult time. a difficult time in our world that requires wise, steady, careful leadership. you have and you are providing that leadership, and i've been very proud to serve with you in the senate, in particular over the last two years as your secretary of defense. vice president biden, thank you as well for being here today. i have not forgotten some of the stories that you told. i recall very well us calling my

mother on that trip to the mountains of iraq and i remember you wanted to speak with her. and hours and hours later -- [laughter] she never forgot that, mr. vice president, and was so proud of that phone conversation. and so i think you for your generous reaching out to my mother at a very difficult time for her. because she was gone about a month later. so thank you. one of my greatest joys during my time here in washington has been the development of our friendship and as you've noted and the president has noted, our

time together, the three of us on the senate foreign relations committee, secretary kerry is here today knows a little something about this business. to you secretary kerry, thank you. i include you in those days. our former chairman chairman oliver is here as well and to dick lugar, thank you. as you have noted there are special people in our lives that we benefit from, and certainly dick lugar is one of those. i think that we all have benefited a great deal from. and vice president biden thank you for your years of service to the country as well. chairman dempsey it's been a great privilege for this little sergeant to have worked side-by-side with the general of

your character and your courage. i've been very fortunate to have you as my partner in this job especially during those self-help and educational opportunities called congressional hearings. [laughter] i was always reassured in each of those hearings as we would drive to the hill in the morning, knowing that marty dempsey was next to me. and for which you have meant to our military marty and which you continue to do for this country, thank you very much. i see another great icon of the united states senate with us today senator john warner who we all worked closely with and benefit from and to our distinguished colleague, senator lugar, warner, thank you for what you've done to this country, as so many of you here

today, and i'm grateful that you would take the time to visit us on this occasion. to the chiefs of the services, our senior civilian leaders and the combatant commanders, thank you. thank you for your unflagging service and your leadership and your commitment to this country. i want to particularly knowledge bob bork. bob bork our deputy secretary of defense, i thank him for his leadership and our strong partnership over the last year. and my appreciation as well to ash carter. for ashes of service and his partnership during my first year at the pentagon, and for his continued commitment to public service. and my heartfelt thanks to my security and advanced staff each of you played important roles for which my family and i will always be grateful.

to my personal staff and those in the office of the secretary you have been indispensable indispensable in helping me carry out my responsibilities, and i thank you. into the men and women who serve our country, and their families, whose service and sacrifice is unequal, you have my deepest gratitude. we salute your higher purpose in defense of our freedoms and our values. every day you wake up and you go to work knowing that his department, this department alone is charged with one fundamental mission the security of this nation. it's been my absolute privilege to have been on your team. over the past two years i witnessed the courage and dignity of america's servicemen and women all over the world. i've seen young enlisted and young officers do their jobs realizing that how, how they do their jobs is just as important

as the job itself. i have seen senior officers and senior enlisted realizing that their role models to be their highest responsibility of all. and i've seen the enduring devotion and commitment of their families mothers, fathers husbands wives children and the sacrifices that they willingly, willingly make for our country. their individual commitment to the greater good and strength of the institution has been a complete inspiration to me in every way. they understand that its people, people who build and strengthen institutions that make the world a better place. these are the reasons why america's military is the most admired and most trusted institution in our country. we must always protect that confidence and trust by our conduct and our performance

continuing to hold ourselves and each other to the highest standards of professionalism and personal behavior. as i will soon leave this job that i have cherished for the last two years, i want you all to know that the thing that i have the most respected and most admired your dignity, your courage and your dedication. the opportunity to have been part of all this is something i could not have imagined when i joined the army 48 years ago. no high office with high responsibility is easy as everyone in this room knows. but with each difficult challenge comes the satisfaction of knowing knowing that you are like teddy roosevelt's man in the arena.

slugging it out doing what you believe, doing what you like, and doing it your way. and recognizing that it's not the critics account or change the world or make the world a better. rather, it's those who are willing to work work very hard toward a better world. we live in a complicated and defining time. the men and women have devoted their lives to america's security are the architects of this new 21st century world. they are building onto the great legacies and foundations that have been laid by those who have gone before them. we've made mistakes. we will make more mistakes. but we hold tightly to one of america's greatest strengths the capacity and the constitutional structure that allows us to self correct. we can change systems, right

wrongs, solve problems, and start over but we must get the big picture done. we must recognize that there is not an immediate answer to every problem. some problems require evolving solutions that give us the time and the space to adjust, and the patients to seek higher ground and lasting results. our world capped his to him easy and complexity is not moving towards less complicated problems. but rather toward a more global challenges rooted in historic injustices and complex. in this dynamic environment, we need to prioritize and focus on how, and how to build greater partnership capacity around the world with our partners. to help solve problems through coalitions of common interests

that help build opportunities and create hope for all people. these are difficult and complicated tasks but we have no choice. it will require study, wise, and judicious use of american power prestige and influence. we must never fail to always ask the most important question we making decisions, what happens next? with all the world prevails in problems, it is still a hopeful world. this i believe. i want to thank my wife with whom i've shared this remarkable 30 year journey. i could never have done this job without her by my side. and i'm especially proud of her work on behalf of military

families and other important issues to the men and women of military. i valued all of her many contributions to this institutions and i thank you deeply for helping me be a better secretary of defense. i want to also thank my daughter allyn my son ziller, for the constants support, encouragement and always good advice. in helping with the internet. [laughter] and recognizing and allowing me to take inventory in that recognition that i am not near as smart as i thought i was. those are the humbling experiences of parenthood that those of us who have had the opportunity to know those days and have that experience and be

blessed with that experience know so well. and to my brothers tom and mike who have truly been with me since it is the train left the station in nebraska, many years ago, thank you. and one last point. of all the opportunities my life has given me and i have been blessed with so many, i am most proud of having once been a soldier. the lessons from my time in uniform about trust, responsibility, duty judgment and loyalty to your fellow soldier these i have carried with me throughout my life. may god bless and keep each of you. thank you. [applause]

>> thank you. [applause] >> today president obama unveils the 2016 budget request at the homeland security department. white house officials say the focus will be on helping middle-class americans. we will have the president's remarks live at 11:45 a.m.

eastern. band live at 12:45 p.m., white house budget director shaun donovan and others discuss the president's budget request. live at 1:30 p.m., pentagon officials and representatives from each branch of the military will hold a series of briefings outlined the specifics of the defense budget request. that is live today beginning at 11:45 a.m. eastern here on c-span2. >> and for more on these departments budgets and other budget highlights we talked to a reporter this went on "washington journal." >> host: niels lesniewski with roll call, cq roll call staff writer joins us once again on the "washington journal." niels lesniewski even before the budget arrived on capitol hill republicans have been handing some information that's come out about some of the programs that are in a. is this budget dead on arrival when it arrives later this morning?

>> guest: well the budget this year is dead on arrival just as it is in the same sense that it is most years on capitol hill, particularly whenever you have divided government. what the budget document is used for by the white house, regardless of party is to lay out its vision for how in sort of an idealized world it would restructure parts of the government, restructure parts of the tax code, and where the executive branch would prioritize investments if it were left to its own devices. but since it's divided government, what really happened is that you'll see lawmakers in both parties try and go through this document and the one and certainly can't things and we've seen a lot of that from republicans, but you will see lawmakers in both parties go

through this document and try to find things that match things that they've already proposed for that they are otherwise interested in to try and pick out little pieces in order to advance their own priorities and figure out places where they might be able to find common ground with this white house. >> host: would argue those areas of potential agreement in the spending plan? >> guest: well one of the things that was released a little bit or came out over the weekend was the significant investment that is being sought to get a full six-year service has protection or highway bill done. now, it's a certainty i think already that the particular mechanism of paying for it using a tax on foreign profits and foreign earnings, that's the way the white house has structured of that the white house has structured of that and

the way the treasury department i suppose would be proposing that is not something that's going to be viewed terribly favorably at the capital. but it is a bipartisan understanding that there's a gap in the funding for the highway trust fund and if people are actually willing to come to the table to find some other alternative tax policy reason or way to pay for it then that's one area where you might find common ground. the other thing is we are just come in going through some documentation that's already come out this morning we are noticing that there is a $561 billion base defense funding request in her along with another amount of money that $58 billion to the overseas contingency operations fund. site think there is bipartisan perhaps agreement that the defense level has got to be

above where it was under the sequester comment that will be another area where he will try to find common ground, they they got away to they got away debate with additional defense funding. >> host: talk us through what is going to happen specifically today after the budget arise and in the coming days this week. >> guest: well, one of the things that is happening today in particular is you'll see the president himself going to the department of homeland security to lay out his budget proposal. that leads with the implication that the president is probably going to be talking at least at some level not actually add anything in the fiscal '16 budget but in the upcoming looming crisis in the fiscal '15 spending situation with the department of homeland security funding which runs out towards the end of february. you will see agency briefing by

the office of management and budget in an assortment of departments and agencies are all going to conference calls or briefings to outlined their very just plans. and then what happens very quickly is tension -- attention turns to capitol hill once the books are delivered and people have a chance -- have a chance to digest just to see agency heads and omb shuttling back and forth to they'll, appearing and lots and lots of budget hearings with the outline their vision ahead of the drafting of the annual budget resolution by the lawmakers at the capitol. >> host: if you want to read about it as this happened in the stores this week niels lesniewski writes for cq roll call. you can check out his work at rollcall.com. thanks for dropping in and helping us out this morning. >> guest: thank you. >> on wednesday military representatives described impact of sequestration budget cuts on national security to a senate

committee. chief of the army navy air force and marines testified before the senate armed services committee. code pink protesters were also there. this is about two hours and 40 minutes. >> the committee will come to order, and, obviously we have individuals here who choose to disrupt the hearing. and so i will ask all spectators who were here to observe airing today, to observe the courtesy of allowing us to hear from the witnesses, and for the hearing to proceed. and, of course, if you decide to disrupt the hearing, as you usually do we will have to pause until you are removed. i don't see what the point is

but i would ask your courtesy to the witnesses and to the committee, and to your fellow citizens who are very interested in hearing what our distinguished panelists have to say who have served our country with honor and distinction, and i hope you would respect that. so we will move forward. the senate armed service committee meets today to receive testimony on the impact of the budget control act and sequestration on u.s. national security. i'm grateful to our witnesses not only for appearing in force today but also for the many decades of distinguished service to her country and uniform. i also appreciate their sincere and earnest attempts over many years to warn that the congress and the american people of what is happening to their services. the brave men and women they represent at our national security if we do not roll back the sequestration and return to a strategy based budget.

we look forward to the candid testimony on this subject today. such warnings from our senior military and national security leaders have become frustratingly familiar to many of us despite an acuity array of complex threats to our national interests, a number which arose after our current 2012 strategy was developed and then adjusted in the 2014 qdr we are on track and now to cut $1 trillion from america's defense budget by 2021. while the ryan-murray budget agreement of 2013 provided some welcome relief from the mindlessness of sequestration, that relief was partial, temporary, and ultimately does little to provide the kind of fiscal certainty that our military needs to plan for the future and make longer-term investments or our national defense. and yet here we go again. if we in congress don't act,

sequestration will return in full in fiscal year 2016 sending our military on a far more dangerous course. why should we do this to ourselves now? just consider what has happened in the world in just this past year. russia launched the first cross-border invasion of another country on the european continent in seven decades. a terrorist army with tens of thousands of fighters isis taken over a swath of territory the size of indiana in the middle east. we are now on track to having nearly 3000 u.s. troops back in iraq and crippling we're falling hundreds of airstrikes a month against isis in iraq and syria. yemen is on the verge of collapse as an iranian backed insurgency swept in and out how to continues to use the countries ungoverned spaces to plan attacks against the west. china has increased its aggressive challenge to american and her allies in the asia-pacific region, where

geopolitical tensions and the potential for miscalculations are high. [inaudible] >> and, of course, just last month, north korea carried out the most brazen cyber attack ever on u.s. territory. let's be clear if we continue with these arbitrary defense cuts we will harm our military's ability to keep us safe. our army and marine corps would be too small. our air force will have too few aircraft and many of those will be too old. our navy will have a too few ships. our soldiers sailors, airmen and marines will not get the training or equipment they need until become increasingly difficult for them to respond to any of a number of contingencies that could threaten our national interests around the world. we have heard all of this from our top military commanders before, yet there are still those who say, never fear. the sky didn't fall under

sequestration. what a tragically low standard for evaluating the wisdom of government policy. the impacts of sequestration will not always be immediate or obvious. but this guy doesn't need to fall for military readiness to be eroded, for military capabilities to atrophy for critical investments in maintaining american military superiority to be delayed, cut or canceled. vis-à-vis the results of sequestration is quiet and cuba to the disruptions that are every bit as dangerous as, for national security. -- these will be the results. i will say candidly it is deeply frustrating editing of this kind is still necessary. it is frustrating because of what dr. ash carter, president obama's nominee for secretary of defense, said before this committee two years ago. and i quote dr. carter. what is particularly tragic is that sequestration is not a result of an economic emergency or a recession. it's not because discretionary spending cuts are the answer to

our nation's final challenge. do the math. it's not in reaction to a change to a more peaceful world. it's not due to a breakthrough in military technology or a new strategic insight. it's not because path of revenue growth and the dumbest thing have been explored and exhausted. it's pure the collateral damage of political gridlock. i would also like to echo what general james mattis told this committee yesterday, quote no foe in the field can wreak such havoc on our security that mindless sequestration is achieving. america's national defense can no longer be held hostage to domestic political disputes totally separate from the rally of the threats we face. more than three years after the passage of the budget control act, it's time to put an end to the senseless policy away with budget driven strategy, and return to a strategy driven budget. our troops and the nation they defend deserve no less.

senator reed. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. they give up on this very important hearing and for your very timely and insightful remarks. i would also like to welcome our witnesses and think these accountable for their extraordinary service to the nation and to the soldiers sailors, airmen and marines that the everyday represent and lead. thank you. this setting takes place as the administration and congress continue to wrestle with two intersecting policy problems and our debate on how to solve them. because of sequester we have a strategic problem. which senator mccain has illustrated very well. every senior civilian and military leader in the department of defense has told us that if defense budgets continue to be capped at sequestration levels, we will likely not be able to meet the national defense strategy without an acceptable level of risk. as senator mccain is indicated, we face a variety of new and continuing threats around the world from ukraine to

syria to yemen and beyond. if we don't address the problem of sequestration, we will severely limit the range of available military options to address these threats and protect our national interest. for the last three years in numerous rounds of congressional there is and testimony our witnesses have described the increased strategic risk and damaging impact of budget control act toppling caps and sequestration restrictions on our military readiness, modernization and the welfare of our servicemembers and their families. i am sure we will hear a similar message today. compromise and difficult choices will be required to provide sequestration relief for the department of defense and for other critical national priorities including public safety, infrastructure health, education. mr. chairman, i know you're committed to working with our budget committee to find a way to work through these challenges, and i'm eager to help in this ever. in the meantime i look forward to the testament of our witnesses. thank you. >> thank you, senator reid.

since a court is not present i asked the committee to consider a list of 41-penny military nominations. all of these nominations have been before the committee the required length of time. is there a motion to favor would report -- >> so ordered. >> a second stick with all in favor? the ayes have it. welcome to all of our witnesses and will begin with you, general odierno. >> thank you, chairman mccain, ranking member reed, other to see which most of the senate armed service committee. thank you for long as the opportunity to talk about this important topic today. as i sit here before you today as sequestration looms in 2016 i'm truly concerned about our future and how we are investing in our nation's defense. i believe this is the most uncertain i've seen the nationals could environment in my nearly 40 years of service the amount and velocity of instability continues to increase around the world.

the islamic state in iraq, of the lot, the rapid dissemination of war in iraq and syria have dramatically escalated conflict in the region. order within yemen is -- she expansion continues there and the country is quickly approaching a civil war. in north and west africa, anarchy extremism and terrorism continues to threaten the interests of the united states, as well as our allies and partners. in europe, russians intervention in the ukraine challenges the resolve of the european union and the effectiveness of the north atlantic treaty organization. across the pacific, china's military modernization efforts raise concerns with our allies and our regional interests while the cycle of north korean provocation continues to increase. the rate of humanitarian and disaster relief missions such as the recent threat of ebola hides the level of uncertainty we face around the world along with

constant evolving threats to the homeland. despite all of this we continue to reduce our military capabilities. i would like to reminded went over the last three years we have already significantly reduced the capabilities of the united states army. and this is before sequestration will begin again in 2016. in the last three years the army's active component and strength has been reduced i ate thousand. the reserve component i 18000. we have 13,000 -- reduced by 80,000. we have eliminated three active aviation brigades. were removing over 800 rotary wing aircraft from the inventory and we have slashed investments in modernization by 25%. we do limit our much-needed infantry fighting vehicle modernization program and we have eliminate our scout helicopter development program. we have delayed other upgrades for many of our systems and

aging platforms. readiness is integrated to its lowest level in 20 years, fiscal year '13 under sequestration only 10% of our brigade combat teams were ready. our combat turning center rotation for several brigades were canceled, and almost over half a billion dollars of maintenance has been deferred. both affecting training and readiness of our units. even after additional support from the vba, today we only have 33% of our brigades ready to the extent we would expect them to be if asked to fight. and our soldiers have undergone separation boards for this to involuntary separate quality soldiers, some while serving in combat zones. again, this is just a sample of what we've already done before sequestration even kicks in again in 2016. when it returns will be forced to reduce another 70000 out of the active component another 35,000 out of the national guard, another 10,000 out of the

army reserves. we will cut an additional 10-12 combat brigade combat teams. we will be forced to further reduce modernization readiness levels over the next five years because we simply can't draw down in strength any quicker to generate the required savings. the impacts will be much more severe across our acquisition program required as to end restructure or delay every program with an overall modernization investment decrease of 40%. on station training will be severely underfunded resulting in decreased training levels. with an institutional support we'll be forced to drop over 5000 seats of initial military train and 85000 seats from specialist training and over 1000 seats in our pilot training programs. our soldier and family readiness program will be weakened and our investments in installation training and readiness facility upgrades will be affected, impacting our long-term readiness strategies. air force is in the ratings were

remain out of reach with the individual and unit readiness rapidly deteriorated between 2016-2020. additionally, over all the mechanism of sequestration has and will continue to reduce our ability to efficiently manage the dollars we in fact do have. the system itself has proved to be very inefficient, and increases costs across the board, whether it be in acquisition or training. so how does all this translate strategically? it will challenge us to meet even our current level of commitment star allies and partners around the world. it will eliminate our capability any scale to conduct simultaneous operations specifically turning in one region while defeating in another. essentially for ground forces, sequestration even puts into question our ability to conduct even wanted long prolonged multiphase combined arms campaign against a determined enemy. we would significantly degrade

our capability to shape the security of our but in multiple regions simultaneously. it puts into question our ability to deter and compel multiple adversaries simultaneously. ultimately, sequestration limits strategic flexibility and requires us to hope we are able to predict the future with great accuracy. something we have never been able to do. our soldiers have been everything that we've asked of them, and more, over the past 14 years and they continue to do it today. today, our soldiers are supporting five named operations on six continents with a nearly 140,000 soldiers committed, deployed or forward stationed at over 140 countries. they remain professional and dedicated to the mission to the army, into the nation. with a very addition our soldiers and our profession being built on trust. but at what point do we the institution and our nation with our soldiers trust? the trust that will provide them

with the right resources, the training and equipment to properly prepare them and lead them into harm's way. trust that we will probably take care of our soldiers and their families and our civilians who so selflessly sacrificed so much. in the end it's up to us not to lose that trust. today their faith in us trust in us to give them the tools necessary to do their job. but we must never forget our soldiers will bear the burden of our decisions with their lives. i love this army and i've been a part of for over 38 years. i want to ensure it remains the greatest land force the world has ever known. to do that though it is our shared responsibility to provide our soldiers and our army with the necessary resources for success. it is our decisions, those that we make today and in the near future that will impact our soldiers army and the joint force and our nation's security posture for the next 10 years.

we do not want to return to the days of a hollow army. thank you so much for allowing me to testify today, and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you general. admiral greenert. >> chairman mccain, ranking member reed, and distinguished mentors of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify about the impact of sequestration on our navy thus far and the impact of a potential return to that in 2016. mr. chairman, presence remains the mandate of our navy. we must operate forward where it matters, and we need to be ready when it matters. i have provided a chart to show you where it matters around the world to us, and where it matters to our combatant commanders that we be. recent events testify to the valley of forward presence. for example, when passed in august to george h. w. bush strike group relocated from the arabian sea to the north arabian

gulf and was on station within 30 hours ready for combat operations in iraq and syria. navy in the rain strike fighters from the carrier generated 20-30 combat sorties per day and for 54 days represented the all the coalition option strike option to project power against isil. the united states ships trucks to establish you as president reassure our allies within a week after russia invaded the crimea. over a dozen u.s. ships led by the u.s. as the george washington strike group provided disaster relief to the philippines in wake of a super typhoon just about a year ago. and the u.s. as fort worth on the uss simpson were among the first to support the indonesian led surge -- search effort for the air asia aircraft recovery. mr. chairman, we have been where it matters when it matters with deployed forces. however, due to sequestration in

2013 our contingency response force, that's what some call from the united states is one-third of what it should be and what it needs to be. sequestration resulted in $9 billion shortfall in 2013 below our budget summation. this shortfall degraded fleet readiness and created consequences from which we are still recovering. the first round of sequestration forced reductions in afloat and ashore operations, generated ship and aircraft maintenance backlogs, and it compels us to extend unit deployment. now since 2013 our carrier strike groups amphibious ready groups and most of our destroyers have been on deployment lasting eight to 10 months, or longer. this comes at a cost of our sailors and our families resiliency. it reduces the performance of equipping and it will reduce the service lives of our ships. navy fleet readiness will likely not recover from a ship and aircraft maintenance backlogs

until about 2018. that's five years after the first round of sequestration. this is just a small glimpse of the readiness price that is caused by sequestration. although the funding levels produced, provided to us under the bipartisan budget act of 2013 they were $13 billion above the sequestration. those budgets were $16 billion below the resources we described in our submission as necessary to sustain the navy. so now to deal with these shortfalls we pushed out modernization that we had scheduled to be done during this defense by. we reduced the government of advanced weapons and aircraft. we delayed upgrades to all but the most critical sure infrastructure. the end result has been high risk, particularly into of the missions that are articulated in our defense strategic guidance. that's our defense strategy that i also provided a copy of that. there's a synopsis of the 10 missions and what's the impact

of sequestration. the missions, the highest risk are those missions requiring us to deter and defeat aggression, and admission to project power to fight an anti-axis aerial denial challenge. now i will return to sequestration in 2016 would necessitate a revisit and a revision of our defense strategy. we've been saying this for years. that would be a budget based strategy for sure. we would further delay critical war fighting capabilities, further reduce readiness of contingency response forces, the ones that are only at a one-third level and perhaps forego our stretch portrait of ships and some brains and further downsize our munitions. in terms of war fighting, the sequestered in navy of 2020 would be left in a position where it could not execute those commissions i referred to. we go from high risk and we cannot execute those missions, and we would face higher risk in five additional missions of those 10. so that's seven out of 10.

more detail on the impact as i just described is on and out hand out in front of you and it's outlined in my written statement which i request be added for the record. now although we can model and we can analyze and we can quantify the war fighting impacts, as general odierno said, what is less easy to qualify is sequestration's impact on people. people underwrite our security. we call them our asymmetric advantage. they are the difference in the navy for sure between us and even the most technologically advanced navy close to us. we have enjoyed reading our our recruiting goals and until recently our retention has been remarkable. however, the chaotic and indiscriminate excursion of sequestration in 2013, it really left a bitter taste with our sailors, with our civilians, and with our families. and the threat of losing sequestration along with a recovering economy is a troubling combination to me. we are already seeing disconcerting trends in our

retention particularly our strike fighter pilots, our nuclear trained officers our seals cyber warriors, and some of our highly skilled sailors and information technology, art aegis radar after nuclear fields. these retention symptoms that i just described reminded of the challenges that i had as a junior officer after the vietnam war period on a downsize. and reminds me of when i was in command of a submarine in the mid '90s a downsize. periods that took decades to correct. however, the world was more stable then, mr. chairman, than it is today. i would say we can't create that same circumstance. sequestration will set us right on that same course that i just described. frankly, i had been before and as general odierno said i don't think we need to go there again. shipbuilding unrelated and optional base also stand to suffer from a sequestered environment. companies that message with a

big ones but the countries that make the key bounce, a key circuit cards and the things that put us together make us the great sea power we are might be forced to close their businesses. and it takes a long time to build a ship and longer yet to recover from the losses of these skilled workers or the materials that some of these companies provide. the critical infrastructure in this final section of our nation's economy is key to see power. so mr. chairman, i understand the pressing need for our nation to get the fiscal house in order. i do. it is imperative we do so i succumb in a thoughtful and deliberative manner to ensure we retain the trust of our people. we have to regain that trust. and to sustain the appropriate war fighting capability for your navy, the forward presence and its readiness. so unless naval forces are properly sized modernize at the right pace with regard to the atmosphere -- the adversaries we might have, ready to deploy and capable to respond in the numbers and that this be required by the combatant commanders they won't be able

to answer the call. i look forward to working with this committee come with the congress to find a solution that will ensure that our navy retains the ability to organize, to train and to equip our great sailors and marines and soldiers and airmen and coast guardsmen in defense of this nation. thank you. >> thank you general welsh. >> thank you, mr. chairman ranking member reed, it's always an honor to be your. the special artistic before you today with three people i consider to be friends, mentors and literally heroes. my pride in the air force and women who give a life hasn't changed since the last time i appeared before you but what has changed is we are now the smallest air force we have ever been. when we deployed in operation desert -- >> repeat that again. we are now the smallest air force -- >> we are now the most air force we've ever been chairman. when we deployed the operation desert storm in 1990 the air force at 188 fighter squadrons. today we have 54 and we're headed to 49 at the next couple

of years. in 1990 there were 511,000 active duty airmen alone. today we have 200,000 fewer than that. as those numbers came down to the operational tempo went up. your air force is fully engaged. all the excess capacity is gone and now more than ever we need a capable, fully ready force. we simply don't have a bench to go to the we can't continue to cut force structure as we've been doing the last two years to pay the cost of readiness and modernization. we will risk being too small to succeed in the task we've already been given. b.c. a little funny will force us to do exactly that. we will have to consider divestiture of things like the kc conflict them the kc conflict, the u2 fleet, the global hawk 40 fleet and portions of her airborne command-and-control fleet. we would also to consider reducing our into nine fleet by up to 10 orbits. the real world impact of those choices on current u.s. market operations would be significant. inin the isr missionary a loan,

50% of high altitude i is our nation's being flown to they would no longer be available. and managers would lose 30% of their ability to collect intelligence and targeting data against moving vehicles on the battlefield. we would lose a meeting of the to i is our fourth the the when doing such great work in iraq and syria today. the air force would be even smaller and less able to do this things that we are routinely expected to you. i would like to say that small air force would be more ready than it's ever been but that's not the case. 24 years of combat operations have taken a toll. in fy '14 and 15 we used the short term funding relief for the balanced budget act that target individuals and unit readiness and the readiness of our combat squadron has approved over the past year. today just under 50% of those units are fully combat ready. under 50%. sequestration would reverse that trend instantly. just like in fy '13, squadrons will be crowded, readiness rates would plummet, ma red and green

flag training exercise would have to be canceled, weapons school classes were would delivered and the air crew members frustration and their families frustration will rise again just as the major airlines begin a hiring push come expected to target 20,000 pilots over the next 10 years. we have a broader readiness issue in that the infrastructure that produces the combat capability over time things like training ranges, test ranges, space launch infrastructure, simulation ever such, nuclear infrastructure, have all been intentionally underfunded over the last few years to focus been on individual and unit readiness. that bill is now do. with b.c. a capsule make it impossible today. the casualty will be air force windows and capability well into the future. i would also like to take better small air force is younger than it's ever been but that wouldn't be true. our small aircraft fleet is also older than it's ever been. if world war ii's venerable b-17 bomber islam in the first gulf war, it would've been younger

than the b-52, akc 135 and the u2 are today. we currently have 12 fleets of airplanes that qualify for antique license plates in the state of virginia. we must modernize our air force. we want to work with you to do within our top line. it certainly won't be easy and require accepting proven operational risk and some missionaries for a time but the option of not modernizing really isn't an option at all. air forces in falling -- fall technology fail. join forces that don't have the breadth of the airspace and cyber capabilities to comprise modern airpower will lose. speaking of winning and losing, at the be safe on the air force will no longer be able to meet the operational requirements of the fence strategic guide. will not be able to sal tells defeat an adversary tonight a second adversary and defend the homeland. i don't think that's good for america. matter what angle you look at it from. we do need your help to be ready

for today's fight and still able to win in 2025 and beyond. beyond. i believe our airmen deserve it. i think our joint team needs it, and i certainly believe our nation still expects that of us. i would like to offer my personal thanks to the members of this committee other dedicated support of airmen and their families and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you. general dunford. >> chairman kaine, ranking member reed, think for the opportunity to appear before you today. i am honored to represent your marines and testified on the impact of sequestration. i would like to begin by thanking the committee for your steadfast support for the past 13 years, duty or leadership we fielded the best trained and equipped marine corps our nation has ever sent to war. i know this committee and the american people have high expectations for marines as our nation's naval expedition force and readiness. you expect them reins to operate forward, engage with partners, deter potential adversaries and respond to crises. and when we fight you expect us to win. you expect a lot of your marines and you should.

this morning as you hold this hearing your marines are doing just what you expect them to be doing. over 31,000 our forward deployed and decades. i've captured with those 31,000 are doing in my statement. i just ask that except for the record in the interest of time. our role as a nation's expedition force in readiness and form so we manned, trained and equipped the marine corps. it prioritizes the allocation of resources we receive from congress. before i address what would happen at the budget control act level of funding with sequestration, let me quickly outline we are today. as we've expense budget cuts and fiscal uncertainty over the past few years, we prioritize the readiness of our forward deployed forces. but in or to maintain the readiness of our forward deployed forces we've assumed risk in our readiness modernization infrastructure sustained and quality of life programs but as a result approximately half of our nondeployed units, those who provide the bench to respond for

the unexpected, suffering personnel to make women and. in a major conflict those shortfalls will result in a delayed response and/or additional casualties. we are investing in modernization at a historically low level. we know we must maintain at least 10-12% of our resources on modernization to field a ready force for tomorrow. to pay today's bills were to investing seven-8%. over time that will result in maintaining older are obsolete equipment at higher cost and more operational risk. we are funding our infrastructure sustained below the dod standard across the future use of defense program at the projected levels we will be probably maintaining or enlisted barracks, training ranges and other key facilities. what we can meet the requirements of the defense strategic guidance today, there is no margin. even without sequestration we will need several years to recover from over a decade of war in the last three years of flat budgets and fiscal uncertainty. in that context bca funding

levels with sequester rules will preclude the marine corps for meeting the requirements to the defense strategic guidance. sequester will exacerbate the challenges we have today. it will also result in a marine corps with fewer active duty battalions and squadrons than would be required for a single major contingency. perhaps as concerning it will result in fewer marines and sailors being forward deployed in position to respond to crises involving our diplomatic posts, american citizens or interests overseas. while many of the challenges of soda with sequestration could be be quantified, is also its human dimension for what we're discussing today and the other chiefs have addressed the. our soldiers center's airmen airmen and marines and the commission never have too faced doubts about whether there will be deployed without proper training and equipment. the foundation of the oval into force as general or general has said is trust. sequestration will erode the trust that young men and women in uniform, civil servants and families have been a bishop in

the cost of losing the trust is intractable. given the numerous and conflict security challenges we face today, i believe dod funding of the budget control act level with sequestration will result in the need to develop a new strategy. we simply will not be able to execute the strategy with the implications of that cut. thank you once again for the opportunity to appear before you this morning and i look forward to your questions. >> thank you, and i think you all are very compelling statements, and i hope that all of our colleagues in effect all the american people, could hear the statement and see the statements that you made today. our most respected members of our society. and i would also have an additional requests. ..

general trend on you made reference on the situation. and i know that my friend, senator reid, he remembers that as well. and as well as he recovered hardware wise and ships and airplanes and guns. but it took a lot wanted and that to restore the readiness

and even the morale of members of our military. all four of you made a reference to it. but perhaps you could elaborate a little bit on the personal side of this. because it seems that there is always the best and the brightest the lead first when there's a pilot they cannot fly. a ship that does not leave the port. when you are in a marine or army outfit that does not exercise or have equipment. maybe each of you would give a brief comment of this intangible , that makes us the greatest military on earth. let's begin with you general odierno. >> thank you senator. the center of everything we do is our soldiers. our army is our soldiers. without them and their capabilities, our ability to do our job becomes very difficult

area it is something that happens over time and my concern is when you are funding readiness, you are funding the development of our young soldiers and you cannot just do that episodically. you have to do it in a sustained manner because it is a continuous learning cycle that allows them to execute the most difficult and complex missions that we face. in today's world those missions are becoming more complex and more difficult in my concern is that they see that maybe we are not going to invest in that and they start to lose faith and trust that we will give them the resources necessary for them to be successful in this incredibly complex world that we face. i think sometimes we take for granted the levels of capability that our soldiers bring and the investment that we have made into their education and training which is a central to everything that we do and we cannot lose sight of that. unfortunately with sequestration

and we cannot take in this fast enough to get to the write-downs because of our commitments that we have. therefore, you have to then look at readiness and training and modernization and so we are losing part of this training that is developing the young men and women to be the best at what they are and the best of what they do. so for us we can never forget that. >> chairman, i bring it everyone to this attention. we asked if we exempted personnel, as if that is good. that means that they got paid. but that does not mean that it has the quality of life and we gave them the housing allotment. but the quality of their work which is what you are alluding to. and what the general was alluding to they are not proficient at what they do and that is why they are not confident. so you are on your own, you have

to have that. knowing that you can be proficient. and so you kind of have a have and have not. if you are deployed, you are flying 60 hours a week sometimes. if you are not employed, you could be flying 10 hours a week. and some of that might be in the simulator. so you are sitting around a classroom looking out the window at your strike fire and it looks really great and it's on the tarmac. but that is not why you joined. the same goes at sea and the same with submarines. so you are not operating in that becomes a behavioral problem eventually because the idle mind is the devil's workshop. we are out and about the alcohol problems are up. i saw it as a jay and then that gets the family problems that just starts cascading. and you put all that together, we have a volunteer force that wants to contribute and they want to do things, they want to be professionally supported in

that regard. thank you. >> general welsh. >> during the the first round, we will likely committed a breach of faith with them. they have still not recovered completely from that and if it happened again it would be absolutely horrible and i believe we would see the effect immediately. i cannot emphasize enough that you might really look what john said about people not joining this business to sit around. looking at their airplanes parked on the ramp, it certainly feels like a hollow or is whether we define it that way or not, same thing with people who want to load weapons on them come as thumper storage areas. they join to be really good at what they do and in fact all they want is to be the best in the world at what they do. all of our people are that way. if they don't think that we will educate them and train them and equip them to do that and to fill that role then they are going to walk. they are proud of who they are proud of who they stand assigned

and proud of what they represent. when they lose that pride we are going to lose them. and if we lose them we are going to lose everything. >> also we are going to have as you made reference to, a significant drop from the airlines as the vietnam hero pilots retire from the airlines and i think that that is an additional issue that we are going to have to face up to anyway without sequestration. >> we have seen it today sir. >> chairman, thank you. you have alluded to this force in the 1970s. and that that time i was in active duty as a commander where we have an organization of about 190,000 greens. but we did not have proper manning or training or equipment. and where we saw the impact was discipline rates we sought in maintenance and equipment and a lack of professionalism. we were unable to maintain the all the people that we wanted to

have i frankly i know myself and many of my counterparts at the time had a difficult decision to stay in the marine corps and many only made the decision to stay once the green corps started to turn around in the 1980s and as you alluded to, it took five or seven years even after we started to make investments to catch up. the thing that i would add to what the other chiefs have said is that most of us would the -- we would not have been able to predict the quality of the all volunteer force and its ability to sustain over 13 years out war. there is nothing that has allowed that force to sustain except the intangible factors and not how much we pay them but their sense of job satisfaction and sense of mission and as i alluded to in my opening statement, the sense of trust. i think that i speak for all of the cheese that none of us want to be of returning back to those days in the 1970s when we did have this hollow force. we were fortunate that we were not testing it at that time.

>> thank you very much, mr. chairman. thank you, sir for your great service to the nation. you have already reduced training, maintenance, you havarti reduced and scratched out acquisition programs and etc. whatever we do, i think that you will manage, which presents the interest and the interesting problem that we could be in a time of steady accelerating but invisible decline until a crisis. and then the record will be severe. so we have to take appropriate action now and the chairman's leadership is absolutely critical on that. so let me just go and ask you individually with all of the losses and everything made, one thing i wanted to discuss his capability rules. and how it is going to work is sequester goes into effect. i will ask the gentleman.

>> i often get asked the question what keeps me up at night and the number one thing that keeps me up at night is if we are asked to respond to an unknown contingency, i will send soldiers to that contingency trained and ready. we are simply not used to doing that. the american people and we expect our soldiers to be prepared and that they have had the ability to train that they will be able to integrate and synchronize activities so they are very successful on the ground. that's the one thing that i really worry about as we move to the future. and the second thing is our ability to do simultaneous things. we are coming to the point where we can do one thing and we can do it pretty well this world that we have today is requiring us to do many things, maybe smaller, but many things simultaneously and i worry about our goal be to do that. >> go ahead please.

>> we are at a time of modernization and our benchmark is the year 2020 in the year to do these missions as i referred to. in the navy, a lot of those missions were higher joint access to areas around the world and again, i'm talking about an advanced adversary. so looking in the future with perhaps the inability that we fall further behind in our electromagnetic maneuver warfare. it is an emerging issue, and the like sequence radars, and that ability. we are slipping behind in our advantage is shrinking very fast senator. also anti-air warfare and the potential adversaries are dancing in that and if we don't have that advantage, we just don't get the job done in this timeframe. the domain we are dominating it today but again we must hold that advantage that includes the ohio replacement and in addition

to the anti-submarine warfare. so it's about access and the ability to get that ask us where we need. cyberis also another one that we talk about a lot. last week and i cannot underestimate the fact that we are good and we will continue as mr. dunford said the forces we put forward, we will put forward and they will be the most ready. we are required to have a response wars and a contingency the contingency force and we owe that to the combatant commander and a has to be there on time and it has to be proficient. if we are not there today, we will never get there with sequestration. >> thank you general. if you could be sustained. >> giving you a long-term capability, test facilities, those kinds of things over time it will cost us the ability to operate in the future. a multiple simultaneous operation and we simply don't have the capacity anymore to conduct that particularly in

these areas and etc. the capability gap is closing its we the people trying to catch up with us technologically and they have momentum and if we let them get too close we won't be able to recover before they pass us. states and nuclear business and in the space business we cannot forget that that is one of the fastest-growing technological gaps in the cyberarena if we don't try to get ahead in that particular race we will be behind for the next 50 years, as everyone else has been behind us in other areas. those are my biggest concerns. >> thank you. go ahead. >> my first concern is to come ashore in a vehicle that is over 40 years old and replacing that is both an issue of operational capability as well as airplanes a meeting they are over 20 are sold. once we get the operational capability. i would say as you alluded to it that my greatest concern in addition to those two capabilities is actually the chemo to the fact of the cats

that we have made today and in the future. everyday i am still finding out the effects of the cuts that have been made today in the sequestration that was put in effect in 2013. >> thank you very much. further complicating your life and our lives is that this is a focus with the ramifications that are governmental. and the impacts will roll back on your. one of obvious example is if the state department -- they won't be able to assist you in the field and the brilliant testimony by the general said last march that i need to find more ammunition if this won't work for the state department. so there are even more subtle effects as well. we provide impact aid for the department of education and the department of education is subject to sequestration and there will be an impact. in fact, the secretary of education secretary duncan, before the appropriations committee laster he said that

the independent school district in texas has many federally connected children including those at fort hood, that would lose an estimated $2.6 million. so we have to take not only does to the department of defense but across the whole government. because when those young soldiers don't afford to don't think that their education opportunities are as good as they were -- that is not your responsibly, that is our responsibility and we want to have a conference of solution to this issue because it will affect you in so many different ways and as the general said, we are waking up getting complaints about how this works with the school and that is not title x. so gentlemen thank you for your service and thank you for your testimony sumac senator? >> tank you, gentlemen, this is very helpful testimony and there are numbers of this committee who are going back and forth today to the budget committee

hearing. we have a debt problem in this country and the general spoke about yesterday with another distinguished panel. and this includes failing to keep the fiscal house in order. we are balancing the spending problem that we have in the government overall with really frankly a lack of funds. in the defense department that you talked about today. general odierno, you said in your 40 years or so of service that this is the most uncertain time you have seen is a professional military person. and admiral this is the fewest number of ships that we have had since world war i. is that correct? >> that is correct, sir. >> general welsh as an air force veteran myself, it's astonishing to hear that this is

the smallest air force ever in the history of the united states. he did say that? >> yes sir. >> okay, right. general don furred, in talking about sequestration you say that it is the funding levels and also it is the rules of sequestration. so i thought i would start with you and we would go back up the panel there. if we were able little bit more easily and quickly to give you flexibility within the funding levels and some relief from the rules, to what extent would that help you in the short run or the long run? >> thank you, senator for that question. the funding capsule would reduce the overall budget by about four to $5 billion per year from fiscal -- from where we were in present 2012. so that is about 18 to 20% and it would certainly be better if we didn't have the rules associated with sequestration

and what i can guarantee senator, is whatever amount of money congress provides united states green corps will build the best that they can. but even that the budget control levels, we will reduce the capacity to the point where we will be challenged with the current strategy. >> general welsh, to what extent would flexibility within these very low levels be somewhat of a help? >> i think that we understand that this has to be part of the nation. we do not believe that that has to be true. the things that we would need is any kind of reduced levels of funding, looking at funding over time and then the ability to make the decision to shape our forecast and the funding levels that are less than predicted. when we look at this and we say a, okay, we can execute this new strategic guidance the budget

projection was $21 billion more per year than we will have at these levels. $21 billion per year require some very tough decisions to be made and some hard and unpopular decisions to be made and without the ability to make those decisions we will continue to be stuck and not sure where we are going in the future. >> the clock is ticking away on that particular elegy, isn't it? >> yes, it is. >> admiral? >> my colleagues have spoken to the value of the number. and i would say that the sequester, that's in alberta them and we have been through this, then we spend months reprogramming with your help here on the hill and we lose four or five or six months on a program like this eight placement program where we do not have time. shipbuilding gets held up, projects get held up that loses the trust within the industry.

super occluding getting sequestered is helpful and continuing resolution having a similar effect that we are not doing any new projects and some of these are pretty critical as we go into that years and need to modernize. >> senator, the first comment i would make is that over the last two years we have been given money above the level of sequestration and the army is still only 3% ready. yes, we love the flexibility that will give us the ability to manage insufficient funds in our department. but that is all it does it allows us to better manage because today we have tried to extend all of our aviation programs. so the cost for every apache has gone up, the cost for every ch 47 has gone up because we have had to extend the program and we have had to pay more than money per system. and so even with this we have

exacerbated the readiness problem even more. flexibility would help, but it is not going to solve the problem that we have which is a problem of insufficient funds to sustain the level of readiness. >> let me just ask briefly. there was a decision that we are would give it to the asia pacific. to what extent do the joint chiefs of staff consults on that? we have eastern europe we have russia and the middle east and anything going on there it does not seem to have calmed down. to what extent was this a pentagon decision that we could even have a week of it to the asia pacific and afford it? >> that was our part of the discussions. we had numerous discussions with the white house when we did our strategic guidance and 2012. that was the foundation of the strategy. senator, i would say that we had a good discussion on what we

call the rebound phase of civic. >> i would agree with that. we had thorough discussions and we thought that the rise of china since 2012 is very important and we had to be able -- we had to have the capability to respond potentially to that and also the problems with north korea and the other problems with the asia pacific. we made assumptions about where we would he and the rest of the world and those have not quite played out the way that we thought with isis and specifically russia and their increased aggression. the strategy is still good but we have to recognize that there are some additional threats out there that we did not expect and that we will have to deal with those. that increases the risk as we look at sequestration and other budget cuts. >> thank you gentlemen. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you all for your service. general welsh i wanted to ask

you in regards to our nuclear mission, it's a very critical mission what impact will that have on your efforts we maxed. >> sir into specific areas are at the top of the list in the first is nuclear infrastructure i mentioned before we have to start modernizing and we capitalizing some of that infrastructure in terms of what was billed 50 years ago. we have an investment plan designed and it is prepared to be put in the place and we actually have it in the president's budget this year and if we go to sequestration all of the facilities with these that we have put into that proposal will fall off the table except for a single weapon storage. so that is the first point. the second is that we do have a representative ironman as a nation to make decisions on what we want to recapitalize and modernize in terms of nuclear weapons and command and control

capabilities over the next 15 to 20 years that affects the air force and the navy. the decisions need to be made in the future, this includes the limit of amount of things that we can do in that arena and they will make those decisions want orton to make earlier so we don't waste money leading into the time when those things have to be done. >> admiral how will this affect the plans you have with the ohio class? >> getting back to the verve, if we are sequestered we lose months and we are on a tight timetable to start elting this in 2021. so that is a one-piece in which we have to continue to do that. the sea-based strategic situation is my number one program. in fiscal year 17 through 20, we have $5 billion invested as advanced or pure rent for the first ohio which is $9 billion

on top of the plan that we have now. so we will have to continue to work in that regard. >> sir, i obviously have the same concern. when you look at the difficulties in serious anorak in that area, what are the kinds of things that we are not able to do there. it would really help to move the ball forward. where you in a tighter spot. general odierno, give us a start. >> in iraq and syria, this is something that will not be resolved in months, it will have to be resolved in years and a combination of efforts with the local indigenous governments and that will require support from us for a long period of time.

it is going to require continued assessment and adjustments on how we believe we will continue to support that effort. over time overtime if that threat continues we will have to reassess what continues. that is the hard part about it is that this is not a short-term problem but a long-term problem. it will take a long-term dedicated effort to solve it across many lines of effort. whether that's diplomatic efforts a combination of joint capability and enabling indigenous forces and training indigenous forces in the capability that we will need to do that. >> in effect you are facing a long-term challenge and as you look at the long-term you may have less tools in the toolbox? >> that is correct. >> thank you sir for the question. we have taken all the risks are fleet units but units in all

stations. everything that the general has asked us to do from a marine corps perspective we are able to do it now. as the general said should this continue on for us it is a question of capacity to do everything we can at a sustainable rate herriot to give you an example, you are all the points for about seven months and home for 14 months in some cases last and then back out. that sustained level of this is something that concerns me and isis is really a part of that. >> that makes it pretty difficult on the homefront doesn't it? >> sir, it is two issues very at the time available to train in all missions and the second is the time available to spend time with family. and particularly when we enlist marines when it comes to that particular challenge. >> general odierno as regards looking forward how are you

planning to mix with the national guard? and how to that figure into your plans as we look forward? >> if you clearly look at what we have done in the end of we go to sequestration, we are taking will 150000 people out of the active army. the large majority of cuts are coming out of the active army. because of that, we will have to rely more on the u.s. army reserves and national guard. we have to remember what we are trying to achieve is our national guard reserves are responding to complex problems. and so the issue becomes, we will have to rely on some areas -- rely on them in the beginning, such as logistics. in areas like that where we do not have enough structure in the active component due to these reductions and we will have to rely more heavily on the national guard and u.s. army reserves for things such as that. in terms of combat capability. they will still have to provide

us this that. we may have to provide this earlier so we have less capability in the active component. this gets to the balance that we are trying to achieve. i worry about the fact if we reduces active component too much it is going to be effective. the world spins much quicker than it used to. instability happens quicker. the necessity of response and for us to respond has to continue to be quicker. i worry that we will lose that capability. we need to respect our national guard and reserves as we move forward. and i worry about that as we go forward. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> chairwoman? >> thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate it. take you all for your leadership and what you are doing for the country. most importantly this

discussion about sequestration and i do believe that it's very clear the impact that it will have in our ability to defend the nation is one that calls all of us to act to address this for each of you. i thank you for being so clear about what the impacts are going to be today. yesterday we heard the same thing from the general both generals about the impacts of sequestration. and there is a sequestration on our devastating impact to defend the men and women in uniform and the nation. each i want to ask each of you when men and women volunteer for service in uncertainty they give up a number of rights that the rest of us enjoy. they volunteer to tell the government, we tell them what to wear -com,-com ma what to do, where to live and to some extent

they give up to some degree what they can say. most importantly they obviously are willing to sacrifice their lives to defend our nation. and returns these restrictions and expectations, congress has guaranteed these brave men and women the ability to communicate with us. i believe that this is very important and in fact congress put into place a law, code 1034, that prohibits anyone from restricting a member of the armed forces and communicating with a member of congress. to all of you who agree that this law is important, yes or no. >> yes. >> yes, ma'am. >> absolutely. >> yes, senator. >> general wells, i want to ask you about comments that have come to my attention.