for the dod, but we haven't heard the same commitment with respect to repealing sequestration for the whole government. the chairman of this committee, chairman mccain put out a report suggesting that should be done, and even if your focus is specifically on national security, it's still very important that sequestration, we look at it not just on the dod accounts but on all of government because whether we are talking about homeland security, state, the dea, the nuclear reactor portion of what the department of energy does, there are so man things in the non-defense discretionary side that really are integral to our security challenges. we have got the responsibility to help dod restore readiness as soon as possible. we will be getting good information that we can use as information to persuade our colleagues of this. i am concerned about one recent development, the hiring freeze that was issued on january 23rd for federal civilian employees. it was not a permanent hiring freeze, it was a temporary hiring freeze to analyze what should be done and i hope it is, in fact, temporary beca

we have 95 less mq 9s because of sequestration. so today's modernization has a readiness impact in the future. today's modernization is tomorrow's readiness. we need to focus on that going forward in the future. what those steps we can dig out of our readiness challenges we have today and bring it up to full spectrum readiness of about 80%. >> thank you for your commitment. general walters, i'm really grateful south carolina has paris island. we are very grateful for such extraordinary facilities giving young people extraordinary opportunity to serve our country and achieve to their highest ability. i am concerned that it was reported last year that we have had only 141 flyable tactical aircraft. we have had accidents that have just been unprecedented and from that situation of danger to our pilots and communities what is the current state of marine aviation? is there a correlation between aviation mishaps and the ability of ready basic aircraft? how do you plan to address this? >> we are addressing the aircraft issue. we have been

ending the threat of sequestration. having budgets that are funded and predictable and consistent instead of having continuing resolutions. and pointing out the real value in a base realignment and closure process to be able to direct and focus resources where they are going to be most effective for our service members and our missions. so on each of those i would like to be part of working with my colleagues from both sides of the aisle to get these things done. i think you made a very good case for why we need to do t why we need to do it now. -- do it and why we need to do it now. for general allyn, the threef 58 brigade combat teams ready to fight tonight, i think one, it says something about our form of government that we would say that publicly in a meeting like this and advertise our state of preparedness or lack of preparedness to the rest of the world, but i understand we say these things to make sure we're making fully informed decisions. i hope that your comments spur us to take the necessary actions to rever

they dressed a fiscal constraints imposed by sequestration. this hearing of the house armed services committee is chaired by texas congressman mack thornberry. >>> committee will come to order. last week the committee held classified and unclassified sessions on the state of the world. or more accurately the state of the world environment in which the american military must operate and u.s. national security must be protected. i was struck by the essential point general petraeus made that we face many threats and can overcome any of them except perhaps what we do to ourselves. today we turn to the state of the u.s. military. i continue to be concerned and sometimes even disturbed by evidence that is accumulating on the damage inflicted upon our military in recent years and the stresses our forces are under. that damage comes from a variety of factors including budget cuts of 20%, continuing resolutions, the failure to recognize or at least admit and then address mounting readiness problems as well as the shrinking size of the force while keepi

because it is not subject to the sequestration cap. so you can leave that at the level set but get around that by dumping action money into the oco account. which gives money to extra programs. addressedtrump ever doing something directly with this budget? guest: he has not. has been one of the most vocal critics in washington, saying this is a flush fund and it needs to be done away with. the money isn't an option. it would require moving the money which will require busting a cap which would require a budget deal. host: why does it remain separate? behind it isea that when there is an operation overseas, the money should be able to move for freely -- move more freely. and not be subject to a cap. if there is danger, they need that money right away without a political battle. host: from florida on the democrats line, girl, you are next. line, earl, you are next. let's go to emmett in louisiana. caller: thank you for taking my call. i can't understand why the media is making such a big deal out of billion.on -- $54 why is that so contr

we both know that sequestration, caps are bc devastating. but it is much bigger than that. how much iell you appreciate your brave face today. that invery concerned the last eight years and in the next 10 years, the federal government is borrowing over 35% of what it spends in the government. that means we are borrowing the other 35%. is ourblem with that discretionary spending is about 30% of our total spend. that means all of the tax money we get in base for a mandatory. that means every dollar we spend on your services in defense of the country, every dollar we spend on veterans, every dollar we spend on domestic programs holdingaven holing -- our military spending hostage is borrowed. we have to go to china to help fund what you're talking about doing. mr. chairman, i do not know how to say this any clear. we are in the throes of i think the worst military crisis we have had in our history, short only to the 1800s when we had to -- when we had no income. i do not care how we do this but we have to get serious as a congress to figure out how to do this. i just have a cou

quote from military leaders but congressman mulvaney has said in the greater scheme of things sequestration cuts were not that big. he also said and i quote, the only thing worse than those military cuts would be no cuts at all. this is the kind of statement that could only be made by a person attached from the reality of what these cuts have meant to military service members. tell that the thousands of soldiers who were forced out of the army because of these cuts. tell that to the marine pilot's who fly fewer hours per month than russian and chinese counterparts because of these cuts, tell that to the air force maintainer stealing parts from retired aircraft and museum pieces to keep their planes in the air because of sequestration, tell that to the crew of the submarine who can't deploy because their boat is no longer qualified to dive, can't receive upkeep because of chronic maintenance backlogs and the thousands of navy sailors who have picked up the slack for an overworked navy by going on extended deployments and spending more and more time away from their families all because of the

army, navy, air force and marines testify about military readiness and the effects of the budget sequestration. other topics include modernization programs and recruitment and retention challenges. this senate armed services subcommittee hearing is one hour and 40 minutes. let me share a couple of thoughts with you. 22 years ago i became the chairman of this committee. >> 22 years ago i became the chairman of this committee. af you are chair ranking member and another committee you cannot share a subcommittee. the committee where really everything is happening. the problems we are facing today are the ones that we deal with. we will do a good job of that. meets with the first time to receive testimony from you guys. i do not think there is a member that this committee has not read what happened yesterday. i know i have. group.joined by the same we have all devices here. general walters and general wilson. i appreciate your sticking to this one more time here. use thek general mattis guidance of the administration plan to rebuild and re-strengthen our armed forces. i looked at some of the thing

when sequestration hit, we got an up close look at what can happen when we are too reliant on federal government spending. and now we're seeing it with oil and gas. oil prices dropped 71%. that hit us hard and our highest energy producing country, gross tax revenue plummeted. at the same time, grt rose in every other county. we lost over 11,000 oil and gas jobs. despite those losses, we added 30,000 private sector jobs. that's a direct result of choosing reforms. jobs in manufacturing, high-tech, finance, tourism, make no mistake about it, we are diversifying our economy and laying a strong foundation for private sector growth. [ applause ] and we are weathering a storm far better than other oil and gas states. that's because we built strong responsible budgets that did not grow government. and we held reserves over 10% were our reserves. when we fall on hard times, government should not expect a tax payer funded bailout. instead it's on us to work together and find solutions. let's make new mexicans proud just as we have done before in how we spend their hard-earned money. when we pu

sequestration cost virginia $9.8 billion and 154,000 jobs between 2011 and 2013 alone. and unless congress takes action, another more severe round of sequestration will hit our economy this october. and so as we began our work three years ago today, we had a choice. we could sit back and watch external forces limit our growth or we could work together to open a new chapter of opportunity. we needed to build a new virginia economy that would grow and create opportunity no matter what happens in washington, beijing, or anywhere else in the world. we needed to redouble our focus on economic development and make virginia more attractive to job creators in sectors like cyber security, bioscience, data analytics, advanced manufacturing. we needed to align every public system, from transportation to public education to workforce development, with the needs of a 21st century economy. we needed to build a more open and welcoming climate to attract families and job creators from every walk of life. and so we got to work. recognizing that 95% of the world's customers live outside

the possibility of return to sequestration remains. there are possibilities of returning to other problems, like government shutdowns. the $600 billion is a good number to keep in mind. plus more costs, and it includes department of energy nuclear weapons costs. it is a reference point. donald trump's campaign promise to build up the military by roughly 15% in size would probably push us to an annual budget of at least $700 billion, maybe more. if you build up fast and put a lot of money into procurement and feel there is a huge readiness crisis today that needs to be addressed. i wrote a short book last year advocating for a $650 billion u.s. annual budget for these costs. i called that the best budget going. the cold war average u.s. defense touch it adjusted for inflation, it was about $525 billion for the base pentagon budget, war costs, department of energy nuclear costs. we are above the cold war average today. a good part of the reason is we have a lot higher costs per person. we are more technologically six to get it, more expe

even if we return to sequestration we will be at 550 or something. china is under $200 billion a year by best estimate, russia with deterioration of exchange rates and sanctions imposed in crimea is no longer $100 billion but $75 million annual spending so the big picture, one could argue we have the rich allies that we are in good shape do you think the defense budget has much to do with russia and china? is it more about sending a message of strength or the way we manage the specific regions dealing with russia and china, battalions and brigades in the baltic states or the overall defense budget has something to do with it? >> it does. the united states needs to do more, it can't to that with the existing budget. it needs -- there needs to be an increase but i will defer to the panel and yourself who are more expert on the numbers but the case for increase is very strong. i would say the overall numbers are deceptive. the whole thing about who is rising or who is not, we really don't know anything based on a human tricks about that. in the case of

how does the president shield the defense department from sequestration?>> the unique thing about the pentagon is the national park service doesn't have groundbreaking technology in the pipeline they are researching. it does affect the pentagon differently. he will do it because this is how you use an all republican congress. you bring a bat, and you say team work, baseball. and these guys have to go home to their home districts in flyover country. trump is saying if you are with me i need $53 billion more, and if you are not, i need a list of names and you wouldn't get re-elected. kennedy: it's not necessarily the case if you don't want to increase military spending you are unpatriotic. >> he will release a cage of rabbits. one will be marked transgender bathrooms. he will talk to his constituency and say as promised i'm here for better national defense and it's not a choice between sanctuary cities and a below thed state department. the state department has a lot of fat to trim. kennedy: thanks so much. good to see you. two thumbs up. the panel returns n

lawmakers about readiness, long-term military strategy, and the physical constraints imposed by sequestration. this is just under three hours.

army, navy, air force and marines testify about military readiness and the effects of the budget sequestrationnclude modernization programs and recruitment and retention challenges. this senate armed services subcommittee hearing is one hour

lonely one world policy, which is impossible to affect and it runs the entire gamut from carbon sequestration which is unusually ignorant, except to the people who are the brokers and make the money because it doesn't reduce the carbon, it just sells one guy's a lot toment somebody else. host: william up next in arkansas nhot springs national park. line for democrats. good morning. caller: yes, good morning. thank you for having me on your show. i actually have more of a question. your guy made a comment about border adjustment tax. he made a good point, said for people like me that don't understand completely what it is we should look it up in full detail. i was curious, could you tell me how to look it up in full detail? every time i look it up on google, the only thing it addresses me to is like newspapers forbes, cnn, fox and all that stuff which we know are biassed. i was trying to figure out where to go to find the information through government pages? host: i'm sure the speaker's office has put out information on this. i'm -- i know kevin brady's office ways and means, has put out info

we were hit very hard to drink sequestration. it did impact our ability to do our work. we were pleased yesterday to see the guidance issued by omb and opm on a hiring freeze in the sense of acknowledging the igs our agency has the purposes of evaluating the exemptions, but that doesn't solve the problem entirely, obviously. so we are looking forward to working with the incoming omb director, incoming and opm, and congress, as we go through the appropriation process. because you're right, ultimately what will happen if we are reducing and cutting staff and limiting our ability to do our audits is a waste, fraud, and abuse that we root out regularly would be impacted. >> is there any place where all of the waste, fraud, and abuse is put together in one report of what the igs have meant to the taxpayer? >> we do an annual report to the president and post it publicly. >> i'd like to see that annual report, and i'd like to really suggest to my colleagues that we might look at some type of a two-tiered approach in the hiring freeze, that if it's an agency that is making the g

with sequestration on top of that we end up looking at folks have been focused on cuts but not on return on investment. i know that sometimes spending money on important projects actually saves you money in the long run, and we get a great return. i was wondering when you look at your models and look at things like infrastructure, research, education, how does our lack of investment in those areas impact our future growth? >> i think the research is fairly clear that generally federal investment does increase productivity and it does have an impact on growth. the research is pretty incomplete and that it identified the different kind of investment is difficult, what the rates of return on different kinds of investment. one of the big things about increasing investment is really depends upon how you pay for it. if you increase investment and reduce spending in other spots so you don't have an impact on spending, that's a much more positive impact on the economy and if you let a deficit grow spirit but if we for example, have a puddle in the road and we don't fix it, it might cost a certai

sequestration, getting rid of that infrastructure, healthcare, aca, every governor is talking about,nt as governors, you make decisions lear. we're the ones on the ground who have to implement it. we're the chief job creators in our state, we have to deal with the healthcare issues and transportation, education, these are all in our bailiwick. we want a good working relationship. >> governor calleru mcauliffe and others have a planned meeting with the president coming up monday morning, sarah >>> the mayor says reform for dc fire and ems are working. at a news conference today, the mayor touted improvements over the past two years, dc fire and ems have filled vacancies upgraded the fleet and made key improvements to 911. the reforms were made after multiple issue where ambulances were needed but nonwere available. according to the fire chief, response times were transport units from go gone minutes to six. hours are arriving on scenes faster as well they say. >> i get in there, about 41 seconds sooner. that's the fire engines in the neighborhoods >> the mayor said she will introduce

they dressed a fiscal constraints imposed by sequestration. this heari

and we are behind the curve as a result of sequestration. so don't tell me that the -- the data is there. we can choose to understand it, and act on it, or we can ignore it. >> congressman? >> the issue that you're raising, rosa, is a very legitimate issue in the sense that, from our perspective, from my perspective, making the investment is one side of the equation. when you have $20 trillion worth of debt, when you have a budget deficit that all economists, all academic studies will tell you is not sustainable on this path. so why not bring more of that mandatory spending, why not bring more of that into the sunlight, why not put more sunshine on it, to make sure that those precious hard working taxpayer dollars are going to the highest and best potential return in our communities and across the country. that is what a fiscal conservative such as myself, when we have this conversation with you, we are willing to make that investment. but we have to make sure that we're not just going to maintain the status quo, because it's in mandatory sp

what you heard donald trump talking about with the military build—up, he made reference to sequestration ona effect when congress could not agree on a budget. in order to cut the deficit, they decided across the board, various cuts would come from various departments, and the military was one of them. those budget hawks have not left congress. they are going to have to be won overfor any they are going to have to be won over for any increases in spending. that means the military, that means the billions of dollars that donald trump's wall is expected to cost. they are going to be very worried and they are going to be watching what he spends his money on very, very closely. it is all very well him talking about the wall, increased money on the military, but he still has two raise the cash. he spent a lot of time, once again, criticising, lambast in the media, the dishonest media, fake news etc? great warm up act, i think that is what comes down to. was getting the crowd riled up. it is one of his favourite pastimes, taking potshots at the american media. the message was, don't listen to s

remember, sequestr drop in a little bit of spending and everybody lost their minds in dc. >> yeah. these pencils are going to have to be sharp because he's asking across the board 10%. that's how much of the budget we're talking about to have to cut to pay for this. it's going to be difficult because u just don'tave that kind of money in the epa budget. you don't have it in the state department budget. that's going to be a big fight, and it's going to be hard for republicans because here's where you're going to get the arguments where you're going to cut education, you're going to cut welfare spending, this is going to hurt low income individuals. that's going to be a tough message republicans to counter. charles: although, frank, we've heard me republicans, libertarians, and conservatives say, you know, we don't need a hug. we don't need an education. why should the federal government be involved in that. help the human services. what is energy anyway? it's not what we think it is. so do you think that this could be the moment where ultimately we could knock down two birds with on

they are for ending sequestration of the military budget. they say you need added revenue.t is the mister because the trump administration has not laid that out. liz: as business network we're looking for tax reform. we're expecting that. everybody said the past couple years, republicans and democrats want tax reform. we don't have it yet. >> i don't think it is going to come too quickly. i think problem here it will be part of just what we're talking about in terms of spending issue. you have got to say here is how it works. here is how we keep, the budget and, budget deficits are critical. and republicans, republican orthodoxy has been, especially coming from speaker ryan, we have to do a better job of reining in spending especially entitlement spending in order to get our budget in order. you can't then divert from that kind of thinking in a sudden motion but they want to support donald trump, make no mistake. i think at these moments when you see the republican versus republican kind of you know, divide come into clear view. liz: when republicans attack. juan, were you

it has been the victim of sequestration for years, and the chinese pushed against us on one side and the russian pushes against us on the other side and they don't respect us and that needs to be rebuilt. the question comes in, how do we do that and fund it. the president stepped up and said he will put decent-sized cuts into a couple departments, state and epa, and epa in particular polices me, and we have aid and we need to restore some back into the american envelope. and then talking about how we get to balance, and i want to hear him say will you pass a balanced budget amendment, and i want to hear him say he would encourage that and support that and i would like to hear paul ryan in the aftermath say let's go with the balanced budget announcement. >> you have a smile on your face, and i am taking that as optimism, and even though there's going to be a big tax cut which may make it hard to show how it will be paid for, and you are supporting it? >> yeah, they do stimulate growth. i look at the tax proposals coming out there and i am uneasy about that, and the border adjustment,

but congressman mulvaney has said that in the greater scheme of things, sequestration cuts were not that big. he also said -- and i quote -- "the only thing worse than those military cuts would be no cuts at all." this is the kind of a statement that could only be made by a person detached from the reality of what these cuts have meant to military service members. tell that to the thousands of soldiers who were forced out of the army because of these cuts. tell that to the marine pilots who fly fewer hours per month than their russian and chinese counterparts because of these cuts. tell that to the air force maintainer stealing parts from retired aircraft and museum pieces to keep their planes in the air because of sequestration. and tell that to the crew of the submarine u.s.s. boise who can't deploy because their boat is no longer qualified to dive and can't receive required upkeep because of chronic maintenance backlogs, and the thousands of navy sailors who picked up the slack from an overworked navy by going on extended deployments and spending more and more time away from their fam

caps on military spending, triggered deep across the board spending cuts known in washington as sequestrationck in 1930. the military is look for increase to the budget about $30 billion this year. the republican chairman of the house armed services committee pushing for increase of 100 billion to next year's military base budget. that would bring it up to $640 billion. david: not just money. trump talked about wasted projects. whether future weapons program or a gas station in afghanistan nobody is using, cost 40 million bucks. so prioritizing as well, right? >> that's right. he has been making statements to that effect. for example the f-35 program, basically sending out a shout to makers of some of these products that we're going to be expecting them to do more for less money. david: right. let's hope he is successful. i want to turn to the dust-up over the military operation in yemen that led to the death after serviceman. president trump slamming senator john mccain for questioning mission success. this is trump speaking, senator mccain should not talk about the success or failure of a m

sequestration, hard caps on defense and domestic. if you want -- and it prevents you from raiding one pot to give to another pair you can't pull from domestic and put it into defense unless you have 60 votes to raise the caps and democrats are going to say okay, you want more for defense spending? we want more for domestic. >> bret: 60 votes is a big fight. when you are talking about no entitlements touched. i didn't hear that from mick mulvaney. i heard let's wait and see what it looks like in the real budget in may. >> two points. first on what we heard from the omb director, i think it's indisputable when you look at the outline of the document, president trump is following through on what he said he would do on the campaign trail, and that's a feather in his cap. you have to give them back. unfortunately one of the things he said he wouldn't do on the campaign trail was reform entitlements, and that's a mathematical necessity. jonah went through some of the numbers for you can't get from here to there in terms of making the debt

me because we see it first hand, issues that when lawmakers couldn't come together and we had sequestration is that hurt maintenance and deemployment schedules and training addrend readiness. so that being said, is i'm a bhunlg either ha budget hawk and against hadwech. we still deliver foreign aid as if it's the cold war. and 2340b even knows of our generosity. i mean we have to change how we come that. i think we can tighten the belt in a lot of different agencies as well, too. defense has taken the brunt of it over the last eight years and we have to get our maintenance and everything restored as a military. so i think we can thread the needle. army has 30% of surplus infrastructure. so that has to be on the chopping block. again, i'm a budget hawk and military hawk. i think that we can look at programs that may not address threats tomorrow that are very big and excess infrastructure and look for cost on savings. >> mccain says the president says he will boost our military, he's not delivering. 3%, $18.5 billion. he says it's not enough, that it's a hollow promise. do you agree with mcca

i don't want to bore you too much with the back and forth on where we are with sequestration. this issue of military posture, and that is what is the posture in the sea of japan, what is the posture there? you can always do some things tactically. sail a destroy near the waters, you can bring a few more subs up. what happened is you had overflights. you'll have a missile test by the north koreans. potentially a couple of b-52s fly close to north korean air space. that is what i would be on the lookout for in the next 24, 48 hours. what is the response of the military. start sailing ships more in that direction and what do they do with airplanes and what kind of airplanes? b-52s or something a little more stealthy. but still let the north koreans know we're making a response and this is what it is going to be on the military posture side of things. >> thank you. while i have you, on all the -- returning to russia and all of the controversy, do you have any sense of how the administration turns the page here. intrigue around flynn, changing his defense. anything to watch out for

he's abandoning the agreement we have when we went forward post sequestration and the rest that any increasesor decreases in one side would be matched on the other side, that there would be symmet symmetry. what the president said himself he obviously didn't know it would be complicated and also doesn't know what the budget is about. it's a statement of our values, it's how we create growth and jobs for people in ourcountry, it's how we educate people to ach their aspirations. it's about our military might. so in his statements he's clearly indicating get another area where he didn't know and thinks nobody else does as well. >> if you don't take it from domestic discretionary and you do increase the military budget at all, even if not to the extent that he wants to, you've got to go to entitlements as speaker ryan deflected when matt lauer asked him about that today, the president ruled that out. are democrats willing to stand up and say to their constituents something's gotta give or else this budget deficit is going to be blown way out of proportion? >> well actually you hear different thin

shouldthe way, congress the blame with this idiotic sequestration. we promised rebuild our military, and we need it. our job -- my job is to work areas thatesident on we agree. on areas we disagree, i will be a up and occasionally subject of a tweet in the middle of the night. [laughter] >> but i do think it is also to point out, as one final note, our constitution says that our has three coequal branches, the judicial, legislative, and executive, and i can assure you that the legislative branch and obviously , from what we just saw on the , that both theer legislative and judicial branches will be exercising our constitutional responsibilities. presidenth with the does, what america does, not what they say. we have seen a lot from the united states, not just from the president but in previous ministrations -- administration's ongoing like refugees, coordination with the europeans, like the middle east. how comfortable you feel with both that formulation as well as where we are heading as the conflict about? >> >> definitely the sense we have in my c

and our national security as in bad a shape as the president continually likes to say it is >> sequestrationue that really took hold in the 2009 and 2014 time period under obama and really led the defense department and homeland security another agencies in terms of spending and recap recapitulation. it went down when the priority was healthcare like it was during the obama administration, president trump will focus on spending and increasing military and talking about presence overseas, with homeland security immigration has been a but there's cyber security, transportation, and other, you know, type issues that happen at the department, i think we're going to go see a lot of different things, general madison mattis are off to a pretty good start in terms of running the agencies >> let's talk about something that just broke on activity. i think this was saturday night. president trump he's breaking with decades of transition skipping the annual white house correspondence dinner. the decision comes just after his remarks with cpac where he again called fake news the enemy of the people. take

we are working hard during sequestration and they had a significant impact on our work. we look forward to working with the director on these issues. finally, i want to discuss the importance of whistleblowers that perform an invaluable service when they come forward with evidence of waste, fraud, abuse or mismanagement and they never should suffer a reprisal for doing so. they provide critical information and we want to make sure they are comfortable doing so. we created a working group to consider best practices to help us better address the issues. we are dedicating ever increasing resources to handle the docket of the whistleblower retaliation allegations and employees of the contractor cond grant recipients. however, the ability to fulfill the responsibilities that the legislation has placed on us and which we welcome requires sufficient staff otherwise it will be difficult to continue and maintain the oversight work as the retaliation docket continues to grow. we look forward to working with kennedy and the incoming administration and the bipartisan house and the s

barack obama never cared about any of that the budget control act otherwise known as sequestration wasite house, slashed funding of our military. as a result, we don't have enough planes, we don't have enough ships. we don't have enough troops. they are not ready to go. they don't have the training, maintenance and modernization of their weapon systems. our ships are old, our planes are old and our troops are not as trained as they were in the past. especially conventional forces. goes back to barack obama was unwilling to prioritize defense spending. what reagan faced after carter. he has got to rebuild a hollowed out military. steve: sure. to your point we have got about the -- the last five years for the budget for the military and as folks can see right there it's going the wrong direction. it's going the wrong direction fora myriad of reasons. what exactly -- it's not like our taxes went down. it's not like washington didn't have more money. they had more money than they have ever had in the history of the united states of america. so where did that money go if it wasn't to the mi