dod will pursue it. reducing overhead will continue to be important and the potential savings will not be enough to meet the targets under the president's budget. to meet the reductions of the skill required, we had to carefully examine the military structure. our structure and modernization proposal has three realities. after iraq and afghanistan, we are no longer doing long stability operations. we must remain with the technological edge over adversaries. the military must be capable to respond to all contingencies and decisively defeat any opponent. accordingly, our recommendations are for a smaller and more capable force and a rapidly-deployable one against advanced adversaries. we reserve all three legs of the nuclear triad. we want a say, securable, and affective nuclear force. we can project power over great distances and carry out a reality more relevant to the president's strategy. we are building hardship capacity and the feeding asymmetric threats. we are sustaining security commitments and ou

for dod, operational agility begins with the acquisition process. as result in the early planning stages for a new system, spectrum management considerations, domestically and internationally, must be taken into account. spectrum managers must have the capability to accurately predict and assess the spectral and fire it, including on a near ra basis.e goal number three, we believe it critical that we enhance our participation in the policy discussions affront. spectrum regulatory and policy impact dod spectrum access, domestically and internationally. effective engagement in the development of policies helps us to better influence new regulatory developments in a way that enhances sharing opportunities and increases the agility of our spectrum use. to this end, the strategy's third goal recognizes the need to be proactive to assess, contribute, and adjust to proposed policy changes. what is the way ahead? the release of this strategy is the first step. the strategy and the associated roadmap and action plan will be updated periodically to reflect le

dod position is simple. the u.s.position is not the dod so my comment would be premature from that aspect the we are working through it from the perspective of how do we do this from a proactive perspective on this? of we make sure the safety life systems are managed at this point? how do we take care of our partners? that include our partners in europe to make sure rebalance that as well. that is the perspectives. at the same time, how do we get technology to move faster to allow us to do these things easier? that is a very difficult and no matter where you are on the globe from that perspective. that's an important part of it. going back to a comment, 20 25-2110 in the reasons we like it is overseas-wise it is not broadband. from that perspective, it marries a very well with other systems if we went into other countries that we would be able to use that frequency without interference from host country systems. that's why it was useful from our perspective and better than 1755-1850 which goes back to the five gigahe

for dod these cuts amounted to $37 billion. they came on top of the $487 ten-year defense cuts required by the budget control act of 2011. the president submitted the 2014 budget plan that would have repealed those cuts in favor of balanced deficit reduction and that would have given dod the resources to implement the january's 2012 defense strategy and maintain a ready and modern force. two months ago, rather than fully repealing sequesteration, congress passed a budget act that provided some relief. it gave dod much needed security, but the defense spending remains below what the president requested in his fiscal 2014 budget request. under the spending units of the bipartisan act, the dod budget is $496 billion this fiscal year or $31 billion below what the president requested. the law also limits dod spending to $496 billion which is $45 billion less than what projected in the president's budget request last year. so dod welcomwelcomes the measu stability the budget act provided, but it forces us to cut more than $75 million

spectrum is a thread that ties all of dod together. the other part of the aspect of it is if you think about, think a three dimension. think of the space dimension which is the across the top, the air dimension which is those aircraft they're going back and forth, and the terrestrial. at that particular point of three communication layers, and all of them connect together on voice, video and data and all have to be across all three pieces. to all the way from space, all the way to the air layer and all the way down to the terrestrial later, all those connections occur and that's really what happens from a db perspective. i think you're seeing that in a domestically as well in the training and we're seeing that grow and grow. let me give you an example. i am a b-2 stealth bomber guys went flying across the world in a nation and a combat or noncombat situation, i have a connection to the satellite continuously. i have data coming in. i have a laptop that sits between me that has microsoft office on it. so i get e-mails and things of that

from the dod perspective and you are worried about the next threat to the nation. this sometimes doesn't have the same priority. but it does matter from a lot of perspectives out there and it makes us more people. that's the key it makes us capable if we do it right. partnerships and collaboration. we are not doing this in the partnerships and collaboration. i think there is a person back there that talk more about the public and private partnerships and that is what we are doing right now today that we had discussed because i think that is the key to a lot of our future out there. proactive versus reactive. proactive has to occur on both sides versus reactive. there is a global context and i'm not sure that everybody understands. i would argue some parts of the industry do not fully understand the impact of that particular piece to it. on the deliverables what can we do today, with midterm. and we made a conscious choice for dynamic sharing for instance on the last spectrum change wasn't available from both a technological site as well a ass the regulatory side. b

dod will pursue it. reducing overhead will continue to be important and the potential savings will not be enough to meet the targets under the president's budget. to meet the reductions of the skill required, we had to carefully examine the military structure. modernizationand proposal has three realities. aq and afghanistan, we are no longer doing long stability operations. with theemain technological edge over adversaries. to military must be capable respond to all contingencies and decisively defeat any opponent. recommendations are for a smaller and more capable force and a rapidly-deployable one against advanced adversaries. we reserve all three legs of the nuclear triad. want a say, securable, and affective nuclear force. we can project power over great astances and carry out reality more relevant to the president's strategy. building hardship capacity and the feeding asymmetric threats. we are sustaining security commitments and our engagement. our recommendations seek to protect capabilities that

spectrum is a thread that ties all of dod together. the other part of the aspect of it is if you think about, think a three dimension. think of the space dimension which is the across the top, the air dimension which is those aircraft they're going back and forth, and the terrestrial. at that particular point of three communication layers, and all of them connect together on voice, video and data and all have to be across all three pieces. to all the way from space, all the way to the air layer and all the way down to the terrestrial later, all those connections occur and that's really what happens from a db perspective. i think you're seeing that in a domestically as well in the training and we're seeing that grow and grow. let me give you an example. i am a b-2 stealth bomber guys went flying across the world in a nation and a combat or noncombat situation, i have a connection to the satellite continuously. i have data coming in. i have a laptop that sits between me that has microsoft office on it. so i get e-mails and things of that

certainly the dod and to d i p class -- and the ip tracks them.i don't know about the legality we can actually shoot at them. these terrorists are professing allegiance to al qaeda, at least portions of them are led by others with ties directly to bin laden, and given that the murdered for americans, does it make sense we should be re-strained in going after them and bringing them to justice. >> if there are terrorists of any stripe we are going to do our best to collect as much intelligence on them as we cap. you have review -- as we can. >> do you have aim -- have a view of the same question? >> we also have to look at ideology that exists within these groups. they share an ideology and i would add that to the definition of corpulent is not just the senior leadership of al qaeda -- of core. it is not just the senior leadership about qaeda. it is an ideology that these extreme groups have. >> would you consider this branch can -- this branch sharing that i'd ideology -- that ideology? >> i would. cap -- director clapper, i'm very concerned that t

so i'm just curious to know if while dod has its spectrum assets, civil users do not. and what is the plan for addressing addressing that? thank you. >> we'll have different -- [inaudible] depending on whether the pizza is going to a private sector user or -- [laughter] yeah. i think we have a lot of work ahead or us on this -- ahead of us on this. first of all, i don't think people appreciate the uass or uavs come in all shapes and sizes. and have all sorts of different applications. so you have to be concerned about command and control, you've got to be concerned about in some cases we're looking to have -- we, i talk collectively -- the realtime video. so we have a lot of work ahead of us in identifying exactly what the needs are and where the appropriate places for them to operate. and i think sharing is going to be, i take as a given. we're going to have to figure out what can they share with. so it's not going to be easy, but we'll find a way. and i just know although it's fcc, it's clearly the federal government as well. >> yeah. i'm glad you brought that up, be

the ryan murray budget deal could cap the budget deal over the next two years, but dod stilill has tout $70 billion from its budget. meanwhile, the administration wants the pentagon to retain more people and reverse plans to retire one of its nuclear powered aircraft carriers. it also wants to increase 2016 defense spending by about $36 billion to soften the impact of land cuts. we went to capitol hill last week to talk t to texas republin congressman, the vice chairman of the armed services committee, the front-runner to succeed in the committee chairman if republicans retain the house in elections this year. i asked what he is expecting and wants to see from the administration's upcoming budget request. >> i thi the first thing is we know what the number is, and ththat's very differe than we dealt with for the last few years, so weon't have all the -- drama that we've had. tough choices have to be made, but still, we know what the total of defense spending will be. that helps managers be able to plan. it helps government officials be able to plan, but it also puts a little bit more

to my knowledge, there were no dod officials consulted. we heard about it in the and the game. way this went down is that many of us sitting around the table serve on the budget committee and as a member of the budget committee and armed services committee, we were not consulted about the cut to the cost of living increase. chairman of the armed services committee was not consulted on this cut. the principlesd in our own law that we passed that said if they're going to be any changes, they would be grandfathered, isn't that right? >> that is correct. cans wonderful that we reach a two-year budget agreement, but what was astounding to me is that once frombecame public, people both sides of the aisle said this is wrong, before we even voted on it. people from both sides of aisle had ideas to fix it, but we could not get it fixed before we inked this deal. we need to fix it now. not leave it hanging over our men and women's head. agree to get this fixed now, not to delay it. this is a lesson. to not include people who serve on the armed services committee, to make cuts to military

this subcommittee was focused squarely in on military and dod. what we didn't have. >> let me ask about dod. i know your report concludes that dod officials believe this was a terrorist attack. and not some sort of a protest gone awry. i want to get specific, so many people have said, why did susan rice go out and talk about protests? why did she mention a video? the cia talking points. the very first draft that went out and circulated at susan rice, ultimately was provided, top officials ultimately saw talked about a protest. they did. the cia came out and said, this is a draft from september 14th, we believe based on currently available information that the attacks in benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the embassy in cairo. does that answer the question, about how how our officials came out and talked about protests and the video? >> we have a senate intelligence report that was issued a few weeks ago, that absolutely states that we have the intelligence to prevent this from happening. that falls right in line with the find

furthermore analysis shows that dod's headquarters structures comprise just over 2% of its personnelnd 1% of its budget. one always said and done an enterprise of the u.s. military size complexity and global reach requires a substantial administrative and support operation. these backend functions can certainly be done more efficiently with fewer contractors in fewer executives, generals and admirals plus their associated staff and that is why secretary hagel announced last summer he would cut civilian contractor personnel by 20%. the total savings however are a fraction of the reductions required by either sequestration or frankly the president's budget over the next decade. the efficiency efforts extended to the services their force structure and operations maintenance as well. the navy for example is pursuing aggressive cost savings initiatives including reducing support contracts and achieving better pricing initiatives to maximize the possible size of their ship inventory, however these efforts generally -- generate fewer savings and planner counted on in her budget there will b

mike mccord are you all know, nominated to serve as dod's next comptroller. all of these very experienced, highly regarded and capable individuals will bring tremendous expertise and leadership to these positions. like bob, their exceptional professionals. these individuals are four of the most experienced national security professionals that dod has had in these positions at any one time. they bring a depth of experience and knowledge and expertise that is as impressive as we've seen here at dod. and i'm grateful that they've agreed to serve in these positions. i'm proud to serve with them. in times of great change and challenge, our country must have the right kind of people interested positions of leadership. i appreciate the senate armed services committee proud action to schedule hearings for these nominees, all this month. if these nominees are confirmed, and if the senate acts on other senior department nominees, now before it, and most of the senate confirm pentagon jobs will be filled. i also have one additional personnel announcement to make, regard

the dod has their work cut out that this is needed. specificallyioned programs like the 8 -- 10 -- a-10 aircraft? >> last year the the plane was designated for cuts. i would expect to see the same fight there. know how much light there has been on that. we're seeing this in a lot of the programs, some of the tri-care cuts they have suggested, some of the pay raises they suggested. dod keeps coming back and saying these are necessary moves, and congress says they are not things we would prefer. >> why is that? >> it is parochial. some of the folks who have bases in their backyard are fighting to keep them. there are old veterans who support them. sometimes it is just election politics. nobody wants to be seen cutting benefits to veterans or troops in an election year or even off election years. that is why we have seen up until last year whatever pay raise that dod has come up with, congress has come up with one that is a little higher. say we have to keep this under control. >> are their regions of the country that would be affected mo

so the leadership at dod is providing and putting forward this new strategy. are you seeing that reflected in any other federal agency? because as you and general wheeler noted, there really is no exclusive dod spectrum, or very little so it's shared with other agencies that may have significant infrastructure investment or operations. thank you. >> yes. oh, okay. on behalf of the federal agencies at large is also reexamining its strategy along these lines. so, obviously it plays and aligns with what is going to be announced later this week. so, i won't go into any kind of the details on that, not get out in front of that, but, again, like i mentioned before, it really should center around technology and innovation and -- but also collaboration, and so it's about -- it's continuing what we have kind of been doing in the sense of the -- bringing the agencies to the table and being on the same page, seeing how they can work together, like in the example with regard to the -- one of the bands, 1755, law enforcement surveillance activities, happens across several

dod agreed it would pay more attention earlier and plan for support of u.s. government facilities and personnel overseas prior to crisis. what we saw with the lessons learned in south sudan what we believe is the first execution of one of these new normal type missions where we used a new normal force, spmagtf-cr, deployed in support of a u.s. embassy. the army as well projected a new normal response force into the embassy. you have both the marines and army come together under this construct underneath a joint commander and executed this mission. i have put up a couple of different thoughts on things we might need to think about as we move forward executing these types of missions. the types of resources we should put against them, how long we would leave those resources in place, who would make those decisions inside of our government when we do those types of operations. pretty difficult problem set, particularly when you look at the size of the forces we have available in dod and the size and scope of africa and the time, space, and force issues associate

to fulfill this strategy, dod will continue to shift its operational focus.tained commitments to key allies and partners in the middle east and europe, maintain engagement in other regions and continue to aggressively pursue global terrorist networks. our reviews made two new realities very clear. first, the development and proliferation of more advanced military technologies by other nations. it means that we are entering an era where american dominance on the fees in the skies and space can no longer be taken for granted. second, defense spending is not expected to reach the levels projected in the five-year budget plan submitted by the president last year. given these realities, we must now adapt, innovate and make difficult decisions to ensure that our military remains ready and capable, maintaining its technological edge over all potential adversaries. however, as a consequence of large budget cuts, our future force will assume additional risks in certain areas. in crafting this package, we prioritized dod's strategic interests and matched them to budget

the department of defense, a lot of people ask me if dod is like dhs, are they different?ow are they different? the dod is essentially a military organization. dhs has people in uniform. we have the coast guard. for the most part dhs is a civilian organization. it is a different culture. like the department of defense, it is a large decentralized organization with components who are capable of running themselves. while i was at dod, i had the privilege of working with two terrific secretaries of defense, bob gates and leon panetta. i was part of their management team. i saw them make decisions. when you are the general counsel you have purview over the entire department of defense unlike almost everybody else. i was part of the management team. helped solved a lot of problems. i was involved in a number of difficult issues. as you remarked, i have been involved national security. i came back to government in february 2009. i have been the eyewitness to many historic events that occurred and were involved in some of the decision-making here in washington. i would say that t

the dod will shift its operational focus to the asian pacific.ustained commitments to key allies and partners in middle east and europe. and continue to aggressively pursue global terrorist networks. our reviews made two new realities very chlor. first the development and proliferation of military technologies by other nations that means we are entering into an era where american dominance in the seas and space can no longer be taken for granted. second defense spending is not expected to reach the levels projected in a five year budget plan presented by the president last year. given the realities we a dafl and make difficult decisions to make sure our military is ready and technical and maintain technological edge over adversaris. but the large budget cuts, our future force will have certain risks in certain areas. in crafting the package we prioritized dod's interest and matched them to budget resources. and this required a series of difficult choices. we chose reductions in every military service active and reserve in order to sustain our sup

as you and the general noted, there really is no exclusive dod spectrum or very little. they shared with other agencies that may have significant infrastructure investment or operations. thank you. >> yes. >> okay. is -- on behalf of the federal agency at large is also re-examining its strategy along these lines. so obviously it plays into alliance with what will be announced later this week. so i won't go into any of the details on that, not to get out in front of that, but, again, like i mentioned before, it really should center around technology and innovation, but also collaboration. so it is about -- it is continuing what we have kind of been doing in the sense that we bring the agencies to the table and being on the same page, seeing how they can work together in the example with regard to ban 1755, law enforcement surveillance a chivvies which happen across several federal and state agencies. so is their way that they can collaborate on developing the next generation of law enforcement surveillance applications and technologies? so it is really about, you know, ge

the department of defense, a lot of people ask me if dod is like dhs, are they different?how are they different? it is essentially a military organization. dhs has people in uniform. we have the coast guard. most part dhs as a civilian organization. it is a different culture. like the department of defense, it is a lars decentralized whonization with components are capable of running themselves. dod, i the at privilege of working with two terrific secretaries of defense, bob gates and leon panetta. i was part of their management team. i saw them a decisions. when you are the general counsel you have purview over the entire department of defense unlike almost everybody else. i was part of the management team. health solved a lot of problems. i was involved in a number of difficult issues. involveded, it national security. i came back to government in february 2009. i have been the eyewitness to many historic events that occurred and were involved in some of the decision-making here in washington. i would say that the thing that comes to mind first when you ask a question li

perspective, from a dod perspective, this is harder.is more problematic and when you are focused on 10 different things all over the world, literally things are happening every single day of a dod perspective and you're worried about the next threat urination, this sometimes does not have the same priority but it does matter from a lot of perspectives and it makes a more capable of we do it right. ed is the key. partnerships and collaboration -- we are not doing this without those. there's a person back there that talk to me more about the public-private partnership. i think that is what we are doing today that we have discussed with. i think that is the key to a lot of our future out there. proactive versus reactive. i cannot jump on that anymore. proactive has to happen on both sides. there is a global context to this that i don't understand, and i would argue that don't -- some industries don't understand the full impact of it. midterm and short-term goal deliverables. what can we do today? we made a conscious choice that sharing was

dod is going to make sure we provide for their families education. it was judged as important to the future force. we honor their perspective, obviously. want you at it and i to know we looked at everything. you talk about the logistics and i would put things like that pos and things like that in there as well. there are lots of things we could do and would like to do to reduce the base infrastructure, we have about 25% more bases and installations than the size of our force would require. we have been told it is dead on arrival, but we need it. to consolidate -- an awful lot of our identified deficiencies for logistics have to be part and parcel. we put it in the budget. in the early years, it cost money. , not a lot ofsion savings. we put the money in to pay for it because we feel we need it so badly for the very reasons you suggest. >> right here, up front. how would it affect the presence on the korean peninsula? said he wants to -- do you want the ?llies to contribute >> the importance of our relationship with korea and the importance of our com

dod looks at the dod. cia. looks at the state department.d to have a single committee for everybody. >> you have been saying that for two and a half years it's still not happening. >> can can i suggest to your viewers hold republican house accountable for not having a joint select committee to get to the truth. >> how do they do that? >> just start calling trey gowdy and others have a resolution calling for joint select committee. he has been a great speaker but why we have not in the house formed a joint select committee with subpoena power. >> why haven't we? >> i know this, two people i would call. susan rice to see. >> as a witness? >> as a witness and mike morrell the number two at the it cia who actually changed the talking points. >> and do you know what i would do? i would issue. >> he. >> i would issue a subpoena and i would demand that documents that are classified, because i think we overclassify. >> overclassify. >> i would demand all those classified documents be reviewed so see if they're really classified or hide things from t

most controversially, trying to balance pay and benefits in the dod budget with readiness training and equipment for the future force. >> todd you are not just a numbers cruncher, you have been on the front lines. what do you hear when the government says they're ready to cut the budget on deans? >> they look this very skeptically. two wars over 13 years, a lot of people, we have had two million americans have deployed to iraq and afghanistan and come home. i think the important thing to remember about this is this is just a gradual scaling back of part of the growth that has happened in the defense budget in the past decade or more. this is not a dramatic change in the size of the budget or in the direction of the military. this is a gradual evolution that is going to happen over time. so i think people should take a hard look at what the pentagon is proposing before they should render judgment on it. >> the hawks are going to say it's the end of the world, the doves are going to say, this is the beginning of balancing the budget in the right way. who is right? who's wrong? >> we've g

i guess the theory is the dod would be all to talk about moore and others would be able to check their work more. >> i think that's part of it and verizon is the ability in a military function and traditionally the cia has a quasi-military function. there is no particular reason why it shouldn't be a cia function because i guess the idea and the whole apparatus at the department of defense, j.a.g.s who are involved with these decisions all the time. >> so the argument is we would have increased oversight. the dni does at least play some role in awareness about these particular programs. the justice department does have to rely on their legality and the white house i think does a lot of work and the bush white house does on trying to oversee these issues. there are a lot of layers. i know this is a big issue and i don't know that it's going to particularly get involved in that. >> we will see how this develops. >> i think there was a growing movement. there was one before the senate armed services committee and there was more discussion because essentially this was the worst kept secret

to fulfill the strategy, dod will continue to shift its focus to the asia-pacific. sustained commitment to key allies and partners in the middle east and europe, maintain engagement in other regions, continue to aggressively pursue global terrorist networks. priorities are very clear. first, the development and proliferation of more advanced though it carried technology by .ther nations at a time where the seas and space can no longer be taken for granted. it is no longer expected to reach what was projected last year. given these realities, we must now adapt, innovate, and make difficult decisions to ensure our military remains capable, maintaining its edge over all potential adversaries. as a consequence of large budget cuts, our future force will assume additional risk in certain areas. we prioritize dod strategic in budget resources. this required a series of difficult choices. he chose further reductions in troop strength. and to protect critical capabilities like special operations forces and resources. delayse to terminate or modernization programs to protect

dod agreed it would pay more attention earlier and plan for support of u.s. government the cities and personnel overseas prior to crisis. what we saw with the lessons learned in south sudan what we believe is the first execution of one of these new normal type missions where we used a new normal force, spmagtf-cr, deployed in support of a u.s. embassy. the army as well projected a new normal response force into the embassy. you have both the marines and army come together under this construct underneath a joint commander and executed this mission. i have put up a couple of different thoughts on things we might need to think about as we move forward executing these types of missions. the types of resources we should put against them, how long we would leave those resources in place, who would make those decisions inside of our government when we do those types of operations. pretty difficult problem set, particularly when you look at the size of the forces we have available in dod and the size and scope of africa and the time, space, and force issues associate

host: has the dod try to make these types of reforms? the issue. is secretary bob gates tried to make a lot of these reforms when he was in office at the pentagon. he just came out with his memoir. when we talk about reform he was to convincerefit -- congress and get compensation through. it is difficult in this town, as you know better than anyone, to get a mr. congress. the pentagon has constituents in each state. state has the national guard, programs that they want to protect. everyone has a constituency that can lock a lot of these programs from being cut going forward. not myways say -- program. not my national guard. it makes it hard to get this stuff through. currently ane appetite in congress to accept these kinds of changes that secretary hagel wants to see? guest: this is the big question. everyone in congress says that they would understand that everyone needs to tighten their belts, but what you heard from a lot of constituencies yesterday was -- not my program. not my national guard. not my bases. this is where you get to the paralysi

and following up on what senator manchin said, i think we felt strongly as we went through dod frank but putting the $10 million cap on the regulations that didn't fall below on the smaller institutions, i think it was good in theory, the challenges has been as best practices get built into the regular mindset even though there may not be a legal requirement for additional regulatory obligations for the smaller institutions, i think it has become kind of best practice model. so i know earlier on when sheila bayer was head of the fdic, there were job owning efforts and others and i would encourage you and your colleagues at fdic and other regulators, this is the fastest growing area in the finance industry and that should be a concern and in some institutions it needs to be and in some of the smaller institutions it -- we are affecting the market in a way, at least from this standpoint, was not what we hoped to do in putting our smaller banks as such -- at such a disadvantage and there may be ways in regard to regulation and part of it may be just a mindset that you could come back to

dod has five components or four components. they all kind of do the same thing. one does on water and one in the air and one on the land. the marines to it in all those areas. homeland security has tsa, ,ustoms and border protection which includes the ports, then you have immigration and customs enforcement. there are all these other components doing a variety of jobs. seemgel together and some out there on their own including federal protective service. i think they are somewhere in the middle so far which is yet to be determined. it's better today than in 2002. nobody would argue or contends that it is not. does it have functionality issues? you bet. those things are still being worked out but it is the largest restructuring since the creation of the department of defense. let's give them a little less like on that. host: democrats line, good morning. caller: thank you for taking my call. i was wondering if you could address the serious question. i'm sure most people have taken notes about the fact that secretary johnson addressed syria. andd you comment how dh

it has nothing to dod with how the winds are actually doing when it comes to, well, let's see, it's monday, let's bring steve in this. this is a look at interstate 880 north and southbound, the traffic moving along well. seriously, the bottom line is both hands on the steering wheel across all bridges, this is a look at the toll plaza, westbound coming across in san francisco. let's look at the maps, the traffic is looking good. and now, let's bring that guy in here, hello, steve. >> we're talking about what, wind? >> well, you know the chp sometimes issues advisories, different from the weather service. >> that is correct. thank you, sir. >>> the rain, if you will, is gone, there's still drizzle, there's fog if you want to call it light rain, that's fine. we'll get a great today, looks like the pat certain changing, although there's moisture stroams across. lake county, maybe northern sonoma could get light rain. we need a break, we need a break. some of the rain totals as we said would approach about a foot, and that did. kentfield did, i have better ones in a second. napa almost seven a

third the federal government is the owner and operator of significant infrastructure, dod alone has overhalf a million buildings, facilities, throughout the world, including some in vulnerable coastal areas. in addition, the federal government manages about 30% of the nation's lands. forests, wildlife, these natural resources face threats from extreme weather. dod has recognized the risks to its facilities and to trying to assess the potential impacts and consider what adaptation may be necessary at facilities in many different environments. regarding federal lands, federal resource agencies are also trying to incorporate climate related information at the local level to decide what to do best. fourth, the federal government is both an investment partner in public infrastructure, and a potential provider of technical assistance. the federal government invests billions annually in public infrastructure projects. for example cbo estimates that total public spending on transportation and water infrastructure is about $300 billion annually with about 25% of that coming from the federal gover

third the federal government is the owner and operator of significant infrastructure, dod alone has over half a million buildings, facilities, throughout the world, including some in vulnerable coastal areas. in addition, the federal government manages about 30% of the nation's lands. forests, wildlife, these natural resources face threats from extreme weather. dod has recognized the risks to its facilities and to trying to assess the potential impacts and consider what adaptation may be necessary at facilities in many different environments. regarding federal lands, federal resource agencies are also trying to incorporate climate related information at the local level to decide what to do best. fourth, the federal government is both an investment partner in public infrastructure, and a potential provider of technical assistance. the federal government invests billions annually in public infrastructure projects. for example cbo estimates that total public spending on transportation and water infrastructure is about $300 billion annually with about 25% of that coming from the federal gove

the dod looks out for the uncertainty of the pree to be sequestered and they're looking how to take these cuts in spending drops. and this is a area that goes right to the heartf our nationals. and we will not only have a week and natural securityut a military that would not be capable to withstand to our adversary. lou: we agree that the cuts are draconian and absolute disaster for the national security. tonight we are startin right now. as you know every year for the mitary to unction we have tw have authorization bills and the funding bills. those are the bis that we are working on right now. we will work through it and are things th need to be reduction and we will take a look at those also congressman mike turner. they do so much. up next, homesales rising, prices posted thr biggest gains. president and ceo richardsmith in the new new york, we don't back down. we only ow one direction: up so we're up early. up late. thinking up game-changinideas, like this: dozens of tax free zones across new york state. move here. expand here. ortart a new business here... and pay no taxes for 10 ye

it was a nine day of closing arguments in the mark with don trial we could prosecute to say that the dod and the shooting was just simply that target practice prosecute a barrie molson was in charge of delivering the state's cousin argument. she said that when my cord on pull ups of the suv with jordan davis and his friends wept as he sat listening to music is loud it really started to boil all beazley the state is trying to dictate the picture of michael dunn where he was some way triggered by some sort of irrational hate towards a certain kind of person. although there was some sort of pre meditation in his actions on the other hand. gonzo is depicted the forty seven year old cousin up in care and father that was literally scared to death and acted in self defense they are full of very different stories that we have today jacksonville the evidence that we've heard throughout this case as it comes to a close knit to last because as we have mentioned done maintains that he opened fire because he felt that his life was grand the evidence backed that up well actually that is the essential