what are the impacts of sequestration? >> on the previous two slides, because of this convergence of the shortfall for higher burn rate this year, if you will, now halfway through the year, as well as sequestration, we've had to touch everything within the department to survive fy-13. when you look at just our direct readiness operating accounts, all the services have had to take different actions over time, and quite frankly, more actions may be on the horizon. but in terms of tangible numbers, and i'm sure the folks to follow us can give even more detail, but the army has already had to cancel seven combat training center rotations and five exercises, and they, like all the services, have had to reduce training and maintenance across the board. the air force, as you probably saw yesterday, announced that there are 12 combat-coded fighter and bomber squadrons that will be stood down. eight are stood down from flying this week. and four more units, once they return from overseas, is also reducing curtailing exercises. a fe

that's why we are here this morning for sequestration. what is sequestration? sequestration is a mindless across the board cutting of what we are now recognizing and republicans are recognizing as something that should not be cut. it affect it is efficiency and safety of our airports. that's very important. but as our distinguished democratic mr. hoyer has pointed out, there is much more that need to be addressed instead of using this as a vehicle. one of the distinguished chairman said earlier the safety of our airports should not be subject to political debate. negotiate should the education of our children, the nutrition for our seniors, 4 million meals on wheels. tens of thousands of children thrown off head start. our defense mindless across the board cuts. what that means for our national security and for the workers in our national security sector. the list goes on and on. investments in our future. buy medical research cut by this. so i suppose if this is an example of governance that the republicans will next come one something else and say we should t

>> sure, it's not just sequestration. it has to be put in the context of the tax increases at the beginning of the year. so putting that all together is -- it's a substantial fiscal tightening, probably going to shave one to one and a half percentage points off of gdp growth this year from what it would be. it's both. the tax hike and the sequestration spending cuts. >> if that is the case, why are stocks going up and up and up? >> all the parts of the economy are doing well, i mean, the healing of the -- what i call the post bubble head winds, the houses overhang, all the things that have kept this recovery pretty dormant, thosthings are dimini diminishing, as they do, the economy is picking up momentum. we're throwing this new monkey wrench at it, which is the fiscal tightening, it's a bit of a tug of war right now, and the battle is joined. i think ultimately the healing forces will win out. we need to get past this fiscal drag first. >> we're hearing from a lot of analysts, they're saying by next earnings season, when

that's why we are here this morning for sequestration. what is sequestration?uestration is a mindless across the board cutting of what we are now recognizing and republicans are recognizing as something that should not be cut. it affects the efficiency and safety of our airports. that's very important. but as our distinguished democratic whip mr. hoyer has pointed out, there is much more that need to be addressed instead of using this as a vehicle. one of the distinguished chairman said earlier the safety of our airports should not be subject to political debate. neither should the education of our children, the nutrition for our seniors, 4 million meals on wheels. tens of thousands of children thrown off head start. our defense mindless across the board cuts. what that means for our national security and for the workers in our national security sector. the list goes on and on. investments in our future. bio-medical research cut by this. so i suppose if this is an example of governance that the republicans will next come one something else and say we should t e

sequestration has already affected military readiness. we have heard testimony that is result of cuts to flying hours, and other training activities and testimony that readiness will fall below its levels for all three military services by the end of this summer. the army for example says about the end of september only one third of its active-duty units will have acceptable readiness ratings far below the two-thirds level that the army needs to achieve to meet national security requirements. these cuts are having an operational impact as well. for example for fixed -- in the deployment of their truman carrier group to the persian gulf has been postponed indefinitely. it will cost us billions of dollars and months of efforts to make up for the shortfalls in training and maintenance and it will be nearly impossible for us to do so if we have a second round of sequestration in fiscal year 2014. our men and women of the military and their families should not have to face both the pressure of military service and the uncertainties of future f

sequestration, sequestration was forever ago and still -- >> at it so small. -- this is the effort to continue, we must have more and more government, more and more employees. the people know that isn't true. they're going to get affected. but the case needs to be made to them. what i keep wondering is where is the narrative that says why are we spending on this and not spending on this? why are we not cutting this and not being smart? and why isn't the president saying i'm going to do everything i can. the congress passed this crazy madness -- >> neil: they also gave him the discretion 0 weighed range of areas to cut. eave agency has obviously huge amount of dollars under it control and they said to the president, that's did in the last budget agreement, more pre prerogative. >> he is in pursuit of a political agenda. this is -- this is disingenuousness for getting pup and attacking people, but to do this on purpose to do it for a political agenda, is unheard of -- >> neil: the pup republicans are happening -- >> they cooperate get themselves out of a wet pap

sequestration will hit 2014 as well. we must sign a comprehensive government wide solution as you have recommended, mr. chairman. would the administrator agree with me that the f.a.a.'s most important asset is its work force. tory employee is critical f.a.a.'s success. i hope we can find a way to do better by them and reach a resolution to sequestration without raiding one account to the detriment of another. we should not spare one set of employees to sacrifice others. we are here today to discuss f.a.a.'s request with the exception of a.i.p. proposal that brings funding at roughly the fiscal year of 2012 levels. i look forward to your mr. huerta. i yield back. >> thank you. we're pleased to have the chairman here this morning for his statement. >> thank you, mr. chairman. director, welcome. fore got a lot of questions you this morning. the first one is going be how come you didn't tell us this beforehand of the sequester, the furloughs. not a word. you did not forewarn us this was coming. you didn't ask advice on how w

i have trouble reconciling this of sequestration. with that i thank you for your attention and now turn to general flynn for his statement. >> thank you. good morning chairman, distinguish member of the committee. thank you for the opportunity to testify for your continued support to the dedicated intelligence professionals of the defense intelligence agency and entire defense enterprise. many of whom are formerly deployed directly supported u.s. and allied military forces in afghanistan and 141 countries and 262 locations around the world. i have been the director for nearly eight month now i cannot emphasize how proud and privileged i am to serve our nation in this capacity. as our defense strategy highlights our nation at the moment of transition. the global security environment as director clapper just stated presents increasingly complex challenges and growing list of threat and adversary. and demands on the united states intelligence system have skyrocketed in recent years they are only expected to increase. the united states f

and has nothing do with sequestration. because the budget country account for sequestration. so, i mean, the lesson i would draw from it is don't believe anything you hear when an administration -- maybe any administration wants conformation. it evaporates three months after the ratification happens. mr. secretary, you suggested a new brac. i think you suggested an upfront cost of $2 hadn't 4 billion. i would suggest that congress broadly doesn't have a big appetite for anything with the significant upfront cost. i'm also concerned that$2.4 billion is just seems a different planet from the last brac where gao said the first five year cost was $35 billion. so how do you jive all of that? >> well, there will be no brac without the authorization of congress, as we note. i'm going ask the comptroller to deal with the specific numbers. because we talked about it earlier. ly respond this way. when you look at the infrastructure required, as we are bringing down our troops reducing responsibility commitment around the world that different kind of structure that we are dealing with n

and that's why we are here this morning for sequestration. what is sequestration? sequestration is a mindless across-the-board cutting of what we are now recognizing, and republicans are recognizing, as something that should not be cut. it affects the efficiency and safety of our airports. that's very important. but as our distinguished democratic whip, mr. hoyer, has pointed out, there is much more that needs to be addressed. instead of using this as a vehicle, one of the distinguished chairmen said earlier, the safety of our airport should not be subject to political debate. neither should the education of our children, nutrition for our seniors, four million meals on wheels. tens of thousands of children thrown off head start. our defense, mindless across-the-board cuts, and our defense, what that means for our national security and for the workers in our national security sector is a -- the list goes on and on. o investments in our future. biomedical research. cut by this. so i suppose if this is an example of governance that the republicans will next come up w

it's called sequestration. sequestration was actually designed to cut spending across the board in a way that was so offensive and so illogical that it could never survive as a law. it was law that was meant to unify both sides of the aisle in an effort to develop a comprehensive deal to fix the economy and our deficit. a responsible congress could have stopped those ridiculous cuts. in fact, i agree with smart mark warner who happens to be a former governor who ran a budget, his state of virginia's budget, and he calls, i quote, he called this stupid. mr. van hollen, who i work with on the budget committee, introduced commonsense legislation that would have responsibly reduced our deficit and ended the sequester. unfortunately the republican majority refused to allow an up or down vote on this floor for that straightforward legislation. they doubled down on irresponsible policies based on an economic map that we now know is completely flawed. it reminded me of a story, two guys are in a lifeboat and the one ho

sequestration. the gentleman from massachusetts i think makes some nice points about sequestration. i think he's in the wrong spot, though. this body has numerous times before sequestration went into effect passed laws to blunt the impact of sequestration. we need to talk to our friendses at the other side of this building who refuse to even discuss any of those bills that were passed in this body to solve the problem before it hit. so, it's a great speech, wrong people, you need to be talking to a lot -- to an element that is a lot more elderly than we are over on this side. and i say that with gray hair. i also, mr. speaker, would reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, let me respond to my friend from utah by simply saying, i think going on a week-long recess while people are being furloughed, while cuts in medical research go forward, while we see cuts in programs like w.

>> no, it was not due to sequestration. it was due to the fact that we have a very weak economy that is not being cured. >> why did retail jobs fall 51,000? >> because retailing is falling off the edge of the cliff. that's the real problem. >> not because of consumer spending. >> the real problem? and what follows from that? >> we may have -- yes, it is a very big problem. we may have -- we have such a low growth at this stage of the game that it tees equivalent of another recession. >> the labor force participation is down to 63.3%. >> the lowest in 30 years. >> since 1979. >> on top of that, following christmastime, butt tees same old problem. we have a two-tier economy where wall street is going like gang busters but job creation is still sluggish. i don't see that changing right now, especially when you've got so much uncertainty in washington, the business world hates unseptember, and we're seeing that reflected. >> the structure of jobs and work in this country is changing just like the media industry is going through

in fact, sequestration is not even enough. -- everyion airport year. far bigger than sequestration. the problem with sequestration, one, it was not flexible, two, it was 50% defense, and three, as governor of virginia, it unfairly it's my state in a way virtually compared to any other state. my objection was, when you are fighting a two front war in afghanistan and iraq, you have uncertainty in the mideast, north korea, and you are going to cut half of the nation's -- half of the spending cuts envisioned will come out of the defense sector? that is just bad policy. secondly, it was -- sequestration was on top of the four ordered $87 billion of additional defense cuts -- $487 billion of additional defense cuts that took place in previous years. for defense, it is $1 trillion over 10 years. >> with the ending of the two defense cuts be part of having responsibility? always talk about recognizing the peace dividend once it was there, but there is no peace in afghanistan at this point. your question about what we have we have already started to see the downturn in certain sectors in vir

sequestration. the president signed it. all free, house, senate, and the president, have to come together so that we can give not just the department of defense but the entire government some to the house some idea month-to-month how much money they will have. your ability to plan is gone. we hope we will fix sequestration before it hits, we don't. now we're here in april wondering if it's going to continue into 2014. i don't think it's any one party is pulte. but all threelt, need to come together and recognize absented decision we're having a devastating impact on many parts of our government but certainly our national security which is supposed to be paramount. you cannot plan strategy when you do not know how much money will have month-to-month. i applaud the chairman for urging the reconciliation to come together and i look forward to finding a solution to that. i look forward to hearing from the witnesses. thus challenging as all of this is, we will deal with it. we will make the decisions. we have certainly faced tou

sequestration is something i would be supportive of in general. it seems to be heading in that direction. they are looking at what the strategic choices are that have to be made. the choice is that we are not going to be able to provide the force levels we have today. the answer is, i cannot do it. they will read prioritize it. re-prioritize its. >> thank you. i do not know of a time of greater attention since the end of the korean war that exists today between north korea, south korea, and us. would you agree? >> i would agree that in my recollection i do not know a greater time. theo you believe we have ability to intercept a missile and if the north koreans launched a missile as is widely reported they would do in coming days? >> we have the ability to defend our homeland, hawaii, guam, forces and allies. >> do you have the capability to intercept a missile if the north koreans launched within the next several days? >> we do. >> would you recommend such actions? >> if the missile was in defense of the homeland i would certainly recommend that a

happy to talk you throw thank you high level known that impacts of federal sequestration on the city and counties. and in addition, some of the other local agencies and some potential impacts to the residents of the cities and coincidences. i thought i'd take thank you high-level of what has happened in the sequesterer and share you to what degree their uncertain and happy to answer any questions. i've handed out a copy of this presentation as well as a high level summary of the high-level impacts thi impacts. the yellow or orange dots are sharing with you have how certain we are of those cuts. you'll remember in not that i'm aware of both the house and the senate voted across the board for the president to act around federal reduction. that threat was not strong enough to get people to take action so on january 2nd the congress detailed implementation of this sequestration puc. congress was still not able to come up with the decision so the sequesterer cuts have been implemented. that means the reduction was 8.2 percent and the implementation going forward would be 5 percent. we don

the one responsibility would be appropriate is sequestration. because you've asked for this my before and i cannot explain how it's going to be used and we haven't given it. why do you think, now is a good time for to ask for it again, and what is the nexus? what is the use? can you justify this? >> sure. the faa's budget is supported through a combination of aviation trust fund and general fund resources. and in proposing this what the administration is silly saying is that we would like to place a high reliance on trust fund activities where fees are paid by the users of the aviation system. we've had this whole discussion about the need to reduce federal spending, and we believe that to the extent that we could raise the significant resources from the users of the system, that that would be a significant, a significant benefit in getting with our larger fiscal challenges that we as a country need to deal with. now, in terms of what the fee would cover, it would reflect the fact that the government provides significant air traffic control serv

sequestration take game one arch.the president's budget back was years beyond the five-year defense plan most of the reductions he proposes. they don't have a significant effect on this five-year defense plan but made it. i think, this is resized by secretary of defense has taken us on a path towards a strategic review because those who advocate not only the president's budget proposal, but full sequestration commode but understand with all due to the force. it doesn't affect the submission that most of the skype are backloaded. explainer seven at 514. that's the reason i can still say with confidence what i said before. >> misters that. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to throw down the budget question because frequently in this committee act if you cut 1 penny from defense, it's unsustainable, unworkable and nationalist purity falls apart and it's obviously ridiculous anywhere in government. if there's basis to cut, it depends where you are cutting them what you're doing and the problem we have right now is seques

first, any proposed sequestration. number two, who signed sequestration into law. and number three, how did he vote foresee questions tration. thanks. guest: i have no idea who proposed it. that is litigating the past. plenty of people pointing fingers at who proposed it and who signed it. the president signed it into law, but had to get to him in the first place. and i think you'll find that democrats and republicans alike voted foresee questions tration as part of a larger debt deal agreement. i voted foresee questions tration but as part of a larger debt deal agreement. put spending caps on government spending, which everyone wanted and put the sequestration in place -- remember the supercommittee, to give that an opportunity to come up with a longer, more balanced deficit-reduction package. it did not succeed and therefore sequestration kicked in. we have been trying to avoid it ever since. the reasonable position is for democrats and republicans like we came together and have something nice irthis time in the process, but come together and come up with a long-

effect, faa says because of sequestration. they are suing both faa and dot seeking a stay of the furloughs in dc district court, they want controllers deemed essential personnel, people that would not be subject to a furlough. they are essential for air traffic control system to continue without major problems, i pressed organization on this, they said, they do not expect though a decision by dc circuit this stay, request by sunday, that is when the furloughs go into effect, they say, the delays should begin sunday in afternoon. here is a quote from nick callio, the president of airline for america, airline trade group, he said, furloughs are illegal. they are irresponsible and damaging, most of all they are unnecessary, saying there are plenty of other places that faa could cut, they are playing political football with this. , when pressed on who do you mean? he said whoever has implemented these cuts, this is the faa, airline stocks have been well over the course of past year, they have done well today. on a day when market

can you give me an answer why congress would do sequestration? we don't want to go there [laughter] we have spoken in intensely about the impacts of sequestration. >> finish it out. if sequestration was fully implemented how does that affect the ability to defend us up through tomorrow? >> senator, thank you for the question. it is part of our mission the single biggest threat for us is our ability to have not only for thepartmedefee this country and that would be severely impacted. being terrible where to0 tr?ld you put it >> 10 over a decade right now it runs through 20 / 21 now to go for the mindless cuts might to authorizing committees agreed need to do serious think on what it is we expect of the enterprise because it is something much less than what we have. of you familiar with the opposition in council? >> yes. i know about it and what it is. >> avila meant -- have you met with them? >> with the opposition council that is the component of the opposition to allow the international community to secure the chemical weapons site to tell the w

who proposed sequestration yucca ? who signed sequestration?st: i don't know who proposed sequestration. that is litigating the past. the president signed into law, that it had to get to him in the first place. i think you'll find that immigrants and republicans alike voted for sequestration as part of a larger debt till agreement. let me be clear about this. i voted for sequestration, but as part of a larger debt to deal agreement. to raise the debt ceiling, the spending cap on government spending, which everyone wanted. and then to put the frustration in place -- remember the supercommittee -- give that up out -- give that an opportunity to come up with a longer and more talents deficit reduction package. and more definite deficit reduction package. it did not happen. withtogether and come up a long-term deficit reduction package that is more balance that replaces sequestration. but litigating the past, again, it does not happen -- it does not help us today. host: here is "washington post was quote -- "a "washington post" piece. what you are

the problem we have right now is sequestration. it's across the board, mindless, deep, done right in the middle of a fiscal year. so the problem that you describe in your testimony are being caused by sequestration and five at massive change have to take to an existing budget. so again i will emphasize to this committee, if we want to help you, the best thing we can do is stop sequestration as soon as possible. because it is a classic gift that keeps on giving. 2014, 2015, 2016. it's going to keep happening unless we stop it. that's first. second, when you look out, as you pointed out, the cuts that are in the president's budget beyond that are 2017 and beyond of roughly $119 billion, depend on how you calculate. at the other problem that we have is that are places where we can cut in the defense budget that will not affect our national security. congress rather consistently stops you from doing it and i wanted to just explore two of those. base closure and personnel costs. on the tricare. secretary hagel mentioned in his opening r

allis >>> is all this talk of delays at the airport just sequestration fearmongering or a real problemon pearson. it's no better there in d.c. than it is in new york city and this area. but if we hear warnings of delays is this just really like, hey, we need you to call your congressman or are these real problems? >> well, the airlines and airlines pilots association think it's all too real. as a matter of fact, they've gone to court and they're suing the faa to try and block the cuts, claiming basically the combination of furloughing 15,000 air traffic controllers over the next six months plus the possibility of ground stops at busy hubs could delay about 7,000 flights a day and create worst case scenario delays at major hubs of up to four hours. they argue the faa has other ways to cut about $650 million out of what is a $16 billion department of transportation budget. >> the faa has and should have exercised the discretion not to furlough air traffic controllers who never in the history have been furloughed before during any budget sequestration, any shutdown of the faa or anything

sequestration sacrifices our national security. intelligence authorization act very narrowly spells out what the intelligence community can do to provide oversight. the flip side is under sequestration, each of these narrowly define programs get the same cut. it doesn't matter the program or timeliness or overall cost, it's throwing baby out with the bath water. take space programs. indiscriminately cut it by 9% to turn off a satellite long before its life is complete. and costs $15 million to operate maintain it and cutting into nearly costs effectively means you cannot operate or maintain the platform. 90% reduction would lead to 100% loss of capability. and once you stop maintaining satellite that turns off, you cannot turn it back on. if one day -- i'm getting close if you one day want to get these capabilities back, say a country is testing nuclear weapons, you will have to replace the satellite for the full cost. to borrow an old phrase, we're being penny wise and pound foolish. abandoning the car on the side of the highway s

that weren't affected by sequestration. the huge -- an extremely high and disproportionate number of air traffic control -- of transportation department's expenditures are air tra traffic -- air traffic controllers themselves. so we have this problem. but as leader reid-pound out -- pointed out, we have other problems. to stop cancer research, to cut back on n.i.h. and n.s.f. which hals been our seed corn? n.i.h. created a biotechnical, a biopharmaceutical industry that's second to none and employees -- employs millions of people in your state, madam president, and mine. and n.s.f. research basically created the internet. that has created millions of jobs and makes u.s. industry the envy of the world. so we're cutting our seed corn. the kinds of programs for veterans who are homeless, the kinds of programs for homebound seniors. the meat ax approach of sequestration cuts those across the board. now, my preference would be to close some tax loopholes to get rid of sequestration. i don't think we should give tax breaks to oil

in the spotlight tonight, sequestration budget cuts hit home. air travelers have faced long delays this week due to faa budget cuts that have reduced the number of air traffic controllers available for work. and as the fbi searched for the bomber suspects last week, national intelligence director james clapper was on capitol hill explaining how nearly $4 billion in cuts to the intelligence community could affect the nation's security. >> unlike more directly observable sequestration impacts like shorter lines to the parks and longer waits at the airport will be gradual and almost invisible until, of course, we have an intelligence failure. >> independent senator ang us king summed it up this way. >> we won't know what we've missed until something blows up. >> yes, sir. >> joining me now, one of the senators at that armed services committee hearing, senator richard blumenthal and the huffington post. we couldn't get an answer given air traffic controllers were told to stay home. are fbi agents going to be told to stay home? are u.s. assistant att

we voted on the sequestration, it's the same top line. but where we run into the problem, as we do in the ryan budget, which i support strongly, because i think the response building -- responsibility we have as congress is to provide for the fiscal responsibility. that's our number one priority. that should be funded at a greater degree than we are. it does put numbers back in that we're taking out from sequestration. does not make up -- make up the difference for the $487 billion that we've already cut. that's gone. >> okay. so where i think we're going to run into real problems, and i've been telling people, let's wait -- the military leaders i've been meeting with, right now we're feeling really good, we passed a budget, senate passed a budget, president gave us the budget and all have the same number for defense, but the senate has a higher top line, the president has a higher top line, and he has increased taxes, so we're so far away from a deal that right now, people are talking about gun control, immigration, things -- the financi

if we sustain sequestration through 2021 and impact if we go through another year of sequestration as in my testimony the senate intelligence committee and the day before intelligence committee we collect are going to have to rethink what we will expect from the intelligence community because it isn't going to be the same. >> general flynn? >> i just want to reemphasize as another se leadein the united states just to reemphasize what director clapper talked about we do not want to damage that vital component of our capability. the sequestrasequestra tion as you on the provides us almost no flexibility not just this year but over the long-haul and one other thing i would like to remind everybody is our adversaries won't take a strategic pause for us to correct ourselves in the real cost a thing director clapper highlighted very well is what i would describe as public insecurity and the potential for strategic surprise and we really won't know what we have missed given the potential damage that the sequestration will have. i think it's mre insidious. >> we won't know what we missed unti

. >> well, the problem we have is with sequestration, it's not only the amount, it's the steepness ofsudden, it's very difficult to do balanced cuts that make sense. so what's occurring this year is, since we can't cut people, because you just can't get rid of them fast enough, and it would cost us more because of the incentives we'd have to pay to reduce a significant amount of military people, we have to take it out of readiness. so what's happening is, we've had to cancel all our training that does not have to do with units going toç ask. so about 80% of the army now, we've had to cancel training events for the rest of the year. and that's causing some really significant issues for us. and i worry that that will lead us to less readiness next year and the year after and the year after that. >> sure. >> and the issue really is predictability of budgets. since 2010, we've had 15 separate continuing resolutions. >> we haven't had a budget. >> so you don't have a budget to plan with, with so it makes ineffective use of that. so i'm starting to worry about the impact that this will hav

immigration, sequestration and the gay marriage abomination. with so much going on in our country today you're probably sitting there at home saying to yourself, hey, self, what would a tea partier think of all of this? we could sit here and speculate all day or we could play another round of america's slowest-growing sensation -- >> ask a tea partier! >> john: big al jazeera bucks at work. news director for the tea party news network miss scottie nell hughes. let's meet our contestants. democratic contestant, contributor to forbes.com as well as an avid fly fisherman and the creator of the character spike on x-men. >> that's true. >> john: it is rick ungar. and bachelor number two republican contestant, a writer and comedian starring in living in exile and author of the complete idiot's guide to comedy writing, please welcome jim mendrinos. great to have you back. >> thank you. let's play the game. topic number one. >> john: you asked for it, you got it. the sequester. on the topic of sequestration what would you as a democrat like to ask a bo

is that under threat due to sequestration? >> as we look at sequestration they are going to look at this. we have to look at all options and things that are out there and see what is affordable and within the context of what the american people want to provide. it will stand on its own merits as far as what we expect our submarine force to do in a equestered budget. >> is there any doubt that we need that submarine availability in what is happening in the asia-pacific region? and in other regions around the world, including what is happening in the middle east. >> there is no doubt that we need the virginia class submarine. we need it to employ a wide range of capabilities. they are all important. i have to look at what are the capabilities that are most important. >> i appreciate it. thank you for your testimony. >> thank you for your service. >> the north koreaian missile that has been moved what countries are under threat from that and what areas if any are under threat from that? >> there has been a movement to he east coa

remember we were told sequestration would mean the end of flying as we know it. airports seem to be functioning just fine. reality check transportation secretary ray lahood. medications? i don't know. last immunization shots? really? honey, what's my blood pressure medicine called? one time i took something and i blew up like a puffer fish. i'm probably allergic to that. at kaiser permanente, your medical information is available to you and your doctors. quickly. securely. no guesswork required. better information. better care. kaiserpermanente. thrive. >>> different than some people thought. the sequester, the series of automatic budget cuts may now be known as the no quester. >> some gloomy predictions have yet to come true. sam brock puts transportation secretary ray lahood under the microscope for comments made. >> no quester has a certain ring to it. you probably remember secretary lahood's cautionary words pretty well. if sequestration goes into effect major airports will be backed up, flights will be cancelled, lines will be long all of this starting he sa

. -- sequestration. this across-the-board furlough is especially surprising that given previous announcements, their guiding principle would be implementing a plan that -- quote -- "maintains safety and minimizes the impact to the highest number of travelers." so announcing three days or so before they implement this plan that potentially results in as much as 6,0700 delays per day, that impacts the highest number of travelers? this is disingenuous. it's mismanagement at its worst. it's incompetence at its worst. it's a failure to do what every agency has been required to do, and that is planning for this. and now that it has been in law for several months, there is no excuse for simply saying, oh, we didn't have time to put this in place, so it is what we're going to do. now, i voted against sequestration because it treated every program on an equal basis, regardless of its essential nature versus a lot of things that are done around here that consume a lot of taxpayers' money that even shouldn't be don

>> who pushed forward the idea for sequestration? to get -- >> it's not a hard question. >> the administration. >> barack obama did so he proposed the sequestration. next question, who offered president obama the flexibility and where to prioritize the cut? >> you know that's misleading. the administration was for total flexibility but it wasn't that, it was a cover -- >> next question. for the year 2013 are we going to spend more money or less money than we did in 2012? >> corrected for -- you mean as a share of the economy? >> are we going to spend more real dollars or less dollars than last year? >> we are back on the same thing. >> why can't you liberals answer simple questions? are we going to spend more money this year than last year? >> you know going to a movies cost a nickel when you were a kid. >> last year -- are we going to spend more money this year or less? did we take in more money or less. >> with the economy, less. >> we will spend more than last year. >> we cut the deficit in half the fifth year. >> just like shutti

this did not happen because of sequestration.arney frank's ridiculouss or comment that i don't guess tax cuts helped here. those are not the kind of things that help. what american is to do is realize, we have people in this world who want to kill us. neil: to their point, governor. i think what he is saying, adjustive it, we would have had more, presumably, security personnel on hand, police on hand, rescue workers on hand to deal with this. by my math looking around the scene before and after, there were plenty of such personnel. i don't know whether in the short time since sequestration boylson street one of them had been laid off. >> well, unless there is some evidence in the boston police force coming forth and says, we were 300 men short, but there was no indication that there was any lack of security for the boston marathon, and i think for people to make those allegations , especially for elected officials, it is simply something for which they should roundly and very visibly apologize for. neil: thank you very, very much

"washington journal >> what sequestration? it is a mindless across-the- board testing of what we are now recognizing and republicans are now recognizing as something that should not be cut. indeed? the efficiency and safety of our airports. -- it be? the efficiency and safety of our airports. efficiencyhe and safety of our airports. the safety of our airports should not be subject to political debate. neither should be the education of our children, the nutrition for our seniors, 4 million meals on wheels, tens of thousands of children thrown off of head tart, our defense, mindless across-the-board cuts. what that means for national security and workers in our national security sector -- the list goes on and on. ,nvestment in our future biomedical research cut. host: john in new hampshire, your thoughts about what representative pelosi have to say. i totally agree with her interpretation of this. she was part of the problem as well. the democratic party voted for sequestration at the time, as well. ,hen it came time for the vo

. >> the federal budget cuts and sequestration hitting the streets of d.c. now. >> this missoni is the latest institution to feel the pinch from the sweeping cuts. -- the smithsonian is the latest. brianne carter reports. >> sequestration is creating change and some of the most popular tourist attractions along the national mall. >> that would be frustrating. >> the smithsonian starting tomorrow will close galleries at the three museums. it will close the comments area -- the commons. and the african mosaic exhibits will be partially closed. close some of the galleries on the third floor. the much everything around. budget part of mandatory cuts. smithsonian officials already cut back on employee travel and training and deferred unnecessary maintenance. now the cuts have forced a reduction in the security contract. >> this affects everybody. >> while it's inconvenient, it will not impact this mantra much. -- this man's trip. >> [indiscernible]. >> these exhibits will remain closed until september 30. brianne carter, abc 7 news. >> president obama marks and 1

now the effects of the sequestration. what are we capable of militarily, whether positioning forces or actually doing something in the event that things could escalate there? >> sequestration will certainly takes its toll on the united states military in the latter part of this year and for years to come rather dram atically if it continues. in dealing with had crisis, we have first-class capability to deal with it. certainly we would move ground forces into the country to assist the 28,000 and the 600,000 man south korean military that is there and we have significant amount of air power and maritime superiority to deal with -- if there was a conflict. there's no doubt about it that the north korean leadership understands, if they initiated a war, they will lose that war and the regime will go away. most of all of this is trying to get concessions and also to preserve the extension of the regime. the regime preservation is their number one objective. >> everyone assumes that china is the key player in getting north korea

this, they say, is going to happen because they have to do it because of sequestration.y don't exppct the court to act on their motion to stay this until after sunday. and sunday's when it will all kick ff. it could be a mess by monday. here is what the airline pilots' association says about all of this. it says, air traffic should not be furloughed period. they are using the airlines system as a political football. that, the captain and the president of the airline pilots association. a lot of republicans have charged that the obama administration is actually trying to make this look worse, make sequestration look worse for the republicans and not taking steps to try and make this system better. ray lahood and company said, hey listen, you want us to save $400 million a year. we have to do it somehow. this is how we're doing it. take a look at airline stocks. today they're doing pretty good. i want to focus on southwest. it had a great year. so have all the airlines. they're up over 60% year-to-date. even if you look today the stocks are okay. but i'll tell you, if what