I will start with some good news well, first of all, i will start with thinking our witnesses for being here and thanking them for their service to our country. Further service to the country. Both served their country in various capacities for a long time, not an easy thing to do. I appreciate that and look forward to continuing to work with you. Unlike last year, we have a budget agreement, and last year we spend a lot of time talking about how difficult it is to run while anything in the government but certainly the department of defense without Appropriations Bills in a timely manner. Last year we were off by 3. 5 months, Something Like that thats better than drifting into the next year. We did get appropriation bills done by december of last year which gives some predictability to the department i think that is enormously important. This year we hope to come a little closer to october 1 certainly on the authorizing bill that also the appropriation bill but most importantly, we have a budget number and hopefully we can get that predictability in place. The second thing thats important is something weve heard a great deal about and that is the socalled blank slate review in the department of defense and that is appropriate to take a hard look at what youre doing and the department of defense is what makes sense, what doesnt and what the strategy should be Going Forward and i think that this is the great challenge of the budget we can go through the line items number by number and talk about the ships and number of planes, but what is the strategy and i think we are still struggling to get a clear and coherent strategy in place that is the history lessons go we have the cold war and a Clear Strategy during the cold war and then we developed a postcold war strategy and now for a number of years we have been in the post cold war period. I dont think that we have still quite worked out for the strategy should be. The terrorist threat is still present and we deal with iran and north korea and the thing that is most concerning to me the secretar secretary and i had about this is that right now we have Ambitious Goals that outstrip our means and that means in too many cases where asking people to do things we dont have the resources to do and i dont know the exact statistics on this but i do consistently here that the Combatant Commander make requests for assets and frequent complaint gives you realize the only med 40 or whatever, so in the blank. There are countless statistics exactly like that where whatever the Combatant Commanders ask for they gave me the half, maybe less what they ask for and a lot of people look at that and say we are not meeting our needs. I look at that and say our strategy is fundamentally wrong. If we are setting up an expectation that we are not even meeting we dont have the right strategy because it is and what they are not spending a fair amount of money 738 billion plus emergency money last year projected to be 741 million this year. We need to rationalize the strategy to the resources to understand what we can do and most importantly figured out how to balance the risk. And i am not unmindful of effectively decide to there is risk attached to that. But thinking that you can do absolutely everything you cant comes with a fair amount of risk and that is why i do think i wouldnt have called for a blank slate review because we do have lessons from the past we shouldnt wipe out but that is just a philosophical point. However you want to look at it bottomup, start over but the review of the strategy is perfectly appropriate and i would look forward to hearing more of the details about that. One aspect this continues to be the audit issue which is enormously important i certainly want to thank the secretary and deputy secretaries and a lot of time on thi this house this as d progress has been made. Progress from an absolutely abysmal situation to one that is bad. We still dont know where we spend our money in many instances. Transfers are not accounted for and we dont know the assets that we possess. There is a reason for that but its still something they need to be committed to fixing because in the era of scarce resources making sure that it does resources at a minimum we know where we are spending then it becomes all the more important so we want to make sure that we emphasize that. That would be to issues beyond the challenge i want to bring up and are concerned about and number one is the money that is once again being diverted for the wall and there are two this year, 3. 8 billion has been reprogrammed primarily out of the procurement budget into the drug interdiction account. This is an enormous problem and for the moment i will put aside the debate about the wisdom of building the wall. Simply focus on the wisdom of walking in and taking money out of the pentagon budget that was authorized and i think that is very damaging to the pentagon. Otherwise 3. 8 billion hold and the message it sends is the pentagon has plenty of money. We just got a long list from the services of their quote unfunded requirements that should be banished from the department of defense language because if it is a requirement and its unfunded thing that sends a dangerous message we ought to be able to in the budget we have that we would have to add it up somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 to 30 billion of unfunded requirements and at the same time we found 3. 8 billion in the corner but can go to the purpose that was not intended to undercut any argument about the need for the resources of the department of defense and also undercut the congressional process. I do understand the emergency law and whats involved in it that basically says if congress doesnt spend the money, the president does. Thats a violation of the constitutional responsibility and significantly undercuts the department of defense and make no mistake about it these decisions have an impact. I mentioned 3. 8 million theres still 3. 8 million to be taken out of the budget for this year, fy 20. That isnt counting to 3. 6 billion taken out last year and that has a very real impact. I was just in europe actually and africa visiting with european command and there are a couple of projects that are part of the European Defense initiative that we are now not able to fund because the money was taken for the wall. These are particularly important and they were done in partnership with our nato ally and if they cannot even rely on us to come through. If we cant come through with out how much can they rely. Meanwhile, russia is aggressively pushing for greater influence in that region. We have to be a reliable partner to offer an alternative to what russia wants to offer in this effort to keep stealing money for the wall is really undermining the department of defense and something regardless of how you feel about the wall. We should have a bipartisan consensus that shouldnt be done. I think that this is the first time the court has done it, the department of defense has done it before. Part of the review to understand how new technology is important and what legacy we can get off of and the cloud is crucial to this as well. I dont care of the contract to be honest with you. I just want to move forward in the process and this is an action the Ranking Member has done a great deal of work on to speed up the acquisition process so that we can take advantage of new technology more quickly in the era of incredibly graphic change and the need to upgrade technology to slow bureaucratic process and the pentagon is a significant impediment to try to find ways to clean that up the contract we have the president once again inserting himself into the debate and causing the problem. I dont know exactly what happened but unquestionably a judge decided that because he didnt want a contract to g theo to amazon because he has a beef with chess, we are now slo slowt down and our ability to properly defend the country. We cannot have petty difference is the president wants to exercise and deeply disagrees with to interfere in policy. Weve seen it in the intel and in the Justice Department. We do not want to see it in the department of defense and i hope people understand we are not making a partisan plant. We shouldnt let the personal preferences of the president did in thgetin the way of good poli. If he has something he wants to decide on on a policy standpoint, thats fine but if it is petty and personal, it isnt worth what it does to the department of defense and elsewhere. Its incredibly important you do the review that you are doing. This is a complex situation we cannot do everything we would like to do. What is the best way to defend the country and how can we leverage alliances whole of government approach so we dont have a militaristic approach to be in the National Security needs balancing all of that is difficult and it definitely takes a sort of start over approach, a thorough approach of where we are and where we should spend our money and how to best meet the National Security needs. I look forward to the discussion and thank the witnesses and yield to the Ranking Member for any statements he may have. Let me join you by thinking the witnesses for being here but even more importantly thanking them for their service this is a security environment and to be charged with what i believe is the first function of the federal government to defend the country is a significant responsibility and i appreciate the service of the secretary and the chairman. I also appreciate the effort the department has made to have a budget that reflects a strategy. We havent had that in quite a while and i think it is absolutely the strategy is imperfect and the budget is in perfect. You cant turn an Aircraft Carrier on the vine and allergy but there is at least a concept around which we can make spending decisions and so i appreciate the effort that the department has put into doing so. There are tough choices and especially with a fixed line it would be a significant challenge for congress to make these choices in a way that reflects the longterm security interests of the country. I also want to say i appreciate the efforts the secretary has made for the defense wide revi review. To get more value out of the taxpayer dollars for the benefit of the war fighter and again we may agree or disagree with some of the specific choices, but the plaintiffplaint is trying to noy make reductions in some areas but make reforms also that can result in the war fighter. I have to also get some commente comments about the recent reprogramming. Article one section eight says its congresss responsibility, not Just Authority that responsibility to provide and maintain, raise and support, if the rules and regulations for the military forces of the United States. There have been literally decades of practice where if there are changing needs money can be moved i into the apartmet with the approval of congress. That hasnt taken place. You can argue that last year there was excess funds in the account because they didnt meet their recruiting goals an and so that money could be used for other purposes. This year is very different. Its not taking excess funds. Its substituting the judgment of the department for, and actually the administration. My opinion is this is not totally at the discretion of the secretary, it is to the judgment of the administration to the judgment of congress. We made a different judgment call them the administrations budget request and in effect what the administration does is say we dont care what has been authorized or appropriated. We are going to do what they want. In this room as long as i have been here, i think a fair amount about the guy that is just to the right of the tv screen, carl vincent, for whom this room is named at his history of the second world war, David Victor Hansen said it broke the back of the navy and 43, 44 is designed and approved even before pearl harbor mostly through the efforts of one visionary, the chairman of the House Naval Affairs committee who from 34 to 40 pushed through the successive bills to expand and reconfigured the navy. In other words he had a different judgment calls and because of what he did we were able to defeat and break the back of the Japanese Navy in 1943, 45. Different judgment calls weve made and the list is long. Predators, isr aircraft, we have made different judgment calls for years. And again it isnt perfect. It looks pretty good. Its sometimes the constitutional issue and let me quote again carl vincent because he got into a tussle with the secretary of defense, louis johnson. And he said congress provides the forces the president commands them. If it is distorted, our whole fabric of government will be in jeopardy. Its whether the constitution, whether the congress will say what kind of defense the nation will have or whether a creature of the congress, secretary of defense, mr. Louis johnson, will tell us what kind of defense he will let the congress have. This is a deeper issue than the wall. I support physical theory years. But im deeply concerned about where we are headed with the constitutional issue about congresss role in the National Defense and whether that is overwritten. We need to hit on all cylinders and the National Defense. There are too many challenges out there for us and im afraid that there is another result of this will be greater restrictions on the departments ability to move things around, to meet the changing needs and the country will suffer as a result. I hope im proven wrong but i am concerned about where this is headed. I will yield about. Thank you, mr. Secretary. Chairman smith, distinguished members of the committee, i appreciate the opportunity to testify in support of the budget request for fiscal year 2021 and im joined by the chairman joint chiefs of staff. The 2018 National Defense strategy provides a clear roadmap for the department of defense to address the reemergence of the competition from the competitors china and russia. Throughout the pentagon, they guide our decisions as we developed to simultaneously contend with the threats of today while preparing for the challenges of tomorrow. We do this by increasing the readiness of the war fighters, strengthening our minds and partnerships and reforming the way the department does business. Additionally we have placed renewed emphasis taking care of our servicemembers and their families. The department is grateful for the support provided in the fy 20 and dod appropriations which allowed us to make vital investments in the military modernization and provide servicemembers the largest pay increase in a decade. Our continued success is upon predictable, adequate, sustained and timely funding and i would encourage congress to pass a package on time to avoid a debilitating effects on the continuing resolution. The departments total budget request is 705. 4 billion. It doesnt keep pace with inflation, given this funding level we are required to make the decisions to ensure the highest priority for fun. To enable the decisionmaking we conducted a defense review and reallocating resources from programs and activities for the objectives over a fourmonth period we conducted examining 100 billion in programs from agencies and activities that make up the state. This review generated 5. 7 billion that weve reinvested back into the readiness and each of the services is also instituting a similar review process. Additionally, this is the third review all the combatant and commands to align the posture and enable them to shift greater emphasis to the region the indo pacific or allow us to return home on the readiness and expand other commands in the coming months by the recent discussions for the Security Force him to be Brigade Combat Team as an example of how the process is enabling to better match resources of each combatant command. The fy 21 budget reflects the same. They prioritized the hypersonic, microelectronics, five g. Communications, Autonomous Systems with key investments and the stealth bomber, the columbia class submarine and proves Nuclear Command control Communications Systems to name a few. They are also enhancing the Missile Defense capabilities to detect against the growing threatthreat of advanced enemy e Defense Systems. This budget request expands the capacity on the interest in space as we consolidate much of the Space Enterprise into the space force. It also advances the Cyber Capabilities allowing us to protect the Digital Infrastructure while covert for the maligned activities this includes defending the integrity of the democracy by assistin dee security of the elections chairman smith, Ranking Member, established numbers of the committee thank you for the opportunity to join the secretary here today. It is my distinct honor and privilege to represent the almost 3 million soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, coast guardsmen and civilians of the United States armed forces thatt trained, equipped, military force in the world. It is a strategy driven budget driven which they were fully aware of and i fully support. The adversary anywhere on the surface of the subsurface. The competitive advantage as no one should have any doubt about that, china and russia are increasing the military capabilities to outmatch the United States and its allies to observe their global influence. North korea, iran and a violent extremist organizations fuel the instability and pose threats to the partner nations into citizens and while the nature of the war is constant, advanced technologies have stretched the capabilities, concepts and processes changing the character of the war in a fundamental way. Additionally, we are recovering from the readiness shortfalls over about 20 years now of continuous warfare with budget instability. This years budget bills on the previous readiness and modernization and i believe the 21 budget is shown as the best allocation of resources and is balanced and in support of the National Defense strategy. It builds a more lethal force and strengthens allies and partners and reforms the department for greater affordability. It also prioritizes the Indo Pacific Region to deter the chinese aggression and maintain stability and ensure access to preserve a free and open system. Additionally the budget accounts for continued efforts in europe to counter russian aggression and will continue to go out in concert with allies and partners to detour north korea or iran while conducting counterterrorist operations in various parts of the world. In short, supports the capable joint force that can compete across all domains today and in the future and it targets the investments in the readiness modernization and development to the people, soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines. It invests in the readiness recovery the last three years and with this committees support, all services are scheduled to meet the goals. The fund is modernization and it improves the Safety Security reliability for the Nuclear Enterprise. It stands up the space force and increases the resiliency in the war fighting options in both space and cyber. It funds the command and control across all the services and with our allies and invests in advanced technologies at the secretary listed to address more complex threats in a faster pace in the changing war. The budget also finally and most valued assets, the armed forces, or people. It also funds facilities, infrastructure, qualityoflife programs come and invests in the education and management processes to develop the junior leaders with a value and ability to win conflicts. It is an instance of today with admirals and generals tomorrow they need sustained predictable, adequate, timely funding to the competitive advantage in this era of Great Power Competition. Good stewards of the resources entrusted to us by congress and the American People i want to thank the committee for your continued support and i look forward to answering questions. Its going to be very difficult to get through. You cant ask the question for four minutes and 45 seconds and get an answer. We will try to let them finish it if you could wrap up so we can move onto the next one, that would enable us to get to as many members as possible. I want to ask about the review and start from that point and maybe get some insight in how that workeand howthat worked ane you started. There were other issues that you looked at and theres been a lot of press reporting on this most of it inaccurate if if im awae that when you look at it, did you contemplate what pulled all of the forces out of africa. Hell for her did that get and then what is the analysis in terms of how you look at our interests and the role that the forces at play and risks where were you going to send them, just walk us through a little but the specifics of how you did that because this is one piece of what they are going to be giving in a lot of other places as well. There are three review is ongoing right now i mentioned in my statement. One is combatant command i will talk about that in a minute into the second is the defense review by type ecmo. Im trying to make sure we are a lie and the second that we can get into the equilibrium demand as we have here in supply which is down here this is what is driving the force in many instances and so the way we began this process comfortably with the joint staff was look at the combatant commands and went through two or three decades worth and discovered they have hundreds of tasks and requirements placed on them that the Combatant Commanders are working hard to achieve in resource and the review is on ongoing and that was easily over a thousand or so as we look at each command what i want to make sure if they came back to me and presented a range of options that make sure we prioritized what they needed to do first do you have the resources they need to meet your contingency plans in the second, power competition and then third it starts becoming unique to the theater and in the case of afrikaans what are your missions to the resources. Its the same to the third becomes counternarcotics and there is some other missions and then what they have been engaging now over the series of months are back and forth as they look at different questions and issues and considerations. There are no plans to completely withdraw all from africa. That has been misreported and repeated over and over again but i am looking to do is make sure that i can resource permissions required and the need to build readiness to deal with china and russia as a part. You give us an example of something youve identified like thats something we dont need to give any more you said we need to move off of that because it is in the best use of our dollars whether in africa or the services were for ever. Or wherever. No decisions have been made yet. The only one made was to replace a regular infantry unit from the 101st it makes great sense in terms of competition because. Swapping out the forces really gets your power competition to a different level. How do we make sure we get those back to where we can meet the needs of there is a crisis but at the same token not allow the others to go back for the better posture that is we havent made any decisions yet. These are the things we are uncovering as we go through this process. Very briefly we have to do and intel analysis. Theres a lot of organizations and groups in africa not all are created equal and actual threats to make sure we right size and have the right type of force to meet that. We are going through that and editing and making sure its rational. The secretary mentioned the Crisis Response but theres other things out there. Camp david signed his death still in michigan, yes or no, argument to be made on both sides. We are going through all that kind of stuff and every purpose out there for the United States military based on the 1960s you can keep the id frees up resources and manpower that can put back the priority of things. Mr. Secretary, we are about to embark on trying to write a Defense Authorization bill for what would be the 59th Straight Year if it is signed into law and i guess my basic question to you is if its going to matter were will they send out a directive saying its authorized and appropriated they are going to take away some money for some planes or satellites and move it over to other things. What the congress does matter is very much and we look to develop our game plan to serve the country and defend the to de country and help us implement. As ive already expressed some of the concerns i have a hope that we can be partners because the country is as a result. Result. Let mwith the ask before we geto all of this should be spent more owe spend moreon this or less o. Help us provide some context for the situation we find ourselves in. If we were to give a brief description to the rotary club in amarillo texas about how the warfare has come in other words the context for which the choices have to be made and a strategy has a different strategy has to be in place, how would you encapsulate that in a brief description . Technology has influenced warfare throughout the ages and today is no different. We are probably in one of the greatest shifts. The character of the war changes largely driven by technology and theres other reasons as well. In todays day and age it is changing because of the missions. The ability of the sensors that are available to many and the ability to see and determine where people are, where things are throughout the world and the range we can engage there is a wide variety of technologies converging in time and space. To change the fundamental character of the four the weapons we fight with and the methods and the doctors etc. We are living through that right now. Who is going to adapt to the changing character of the most and who is going to have it about right, youll never get it perfect if you have to get it right more than your average. Adversary. But this does is based out of the foundation it doesnt create the future that it does lay the foundation with research developed and. Thank you mr. Chairman and both of you for your service and for joining us today. I want to join the comments regarding the transfer of the funds. As we know thereve been a lot of comments about the budget predictability from congress, and i appreciate that. I think that is the right way to go of course but could you tell us what funds are you planning on transferring so that we can find a better use for those dollars now . If they were not requested if they are not important if they are not a highpriority, why are they they are and arent there many uses that we have for those dollars . A high priority was there a discussion about that but you felt you could change it at the message you are sending there are so many things that have been touched by that that it sends a message the military doesnt need that money. To pay back those dollars we are sitting here without having been involved in a decision. The decision. The transfer decision specifically. I understood what you are saying the president determined we have a National Emergency on the southwest border. It was requiring the support of the dod and that is our role in the process. Is the southern Border Security in the National Defense strategy . Its one of the things the administrations supported in the past theres a lot of things we do that are not always captured. There are a those you know youre going to pass that isnt in the National Defense strategy that i think thats important for congress to know that you are telling us it isnt important. Theres a lot of things that we do that is into the National Defense that we are trying to clean up as we do a review in the rest of the services. If i could turn to you for a second there is about 8 billion left in funds and thats how they have the budget so is it in your best military advice that cutting the virginia submarine to increase his good prioritization . In that particular case i wasnt personally involved in the decision of the. That was a case where there was some internal deliberation at the last minute to make sure the Nuclear Enterprise was fully funded. Had i been, i would have supported the full funding of the Nuclear Enterprise. We havent had a great four in 75 years since world war ii. A big reason for that is the United States Nuclear Enterprise. Its not the only reason i believe as i said in the testimony previously that the number one priority is to make sure we have a safe, secure Nuclear Enterprise. I apologize but they are going to have to leave it there. Thank you for being here to discuss the Defense Authorization budget request. The United States faces complex and Dynamic Security environments and thankfully the budget for the National Security matters promotes peace and strength and that is where i want to mention how much i appreciated joining you to earning it visiting the troops at fort jackson last year and then you not only served but then you joined the troops in repelling from the tower and that was very impressive. Its been correctly cited to deterring the adversaries. President trump has made clear the department of defense is to modernize the aging Nuclear Enterprise is. Can you provide the committee with an update where china and russia are with their Nuclear Capabilities and why we need to modernize and expand the American Nuclear programs click with respect to russia they are the only country on the earth that represents an actual vote getting access to joke that every man, woman and child in that we could do the same. They know that and we know that is deterrence, so maintaining a Nuclear Enterprise is critical. We are at the plaintiff to modernize and invest in the triad in order to ensure ourselves security in the futu future. It is important to defend our Cyber Networks and the acting secretary of the navy said five days ago its not so much the toptier suppliers at the second and third tier suppliers but they love vulnerabilities that they had discussed and discovered. What is being done to address this threat and what industries are most vulnerable . As you move from the pine all the way down the supply chain the more you get out there the more vulnerable they typically are. I know our folks in the Research Engineering and acquisition are working on programs where we might be able to assist them with about a surety. I met recently and had dinner with a number of company ceos where we discussed this same issue but they have to do a better job and help extended tier second, third, fourth tier suppliers so that they have confidence in the system once they come together and provide that capability. I believe that the ss 35 aircraft are essential to securing and maintaining superiority. However, can you tell us what it brings to the fight in support of Ground Troops and how is it a game changer for the troops on the ground . When the bullets are flying you call for deck helicopters or support ended the 35, it is the premier bomber in the world. Its an incredible aircraft. Its obviously very, very expensive but it is incredible and there will be significant Weapon System in support of Ground Forces in the future. And also one thing on this piece the United States army and green core are not under sustained attack really since normandy. We have the most reliable air force world has seen. That is what the f. 35 is all about making sure we dont lose them on the ground from enemy air. We are grateful they are located in the air station. Thank you very much. Thank you mr. Chairman, mr. Secretary i want to thank you for testimony here today and on behalf of the nation for keeping us safe. I want to followup in commenting. Its called concerned the budget only include one sub rather than to and biscuits the recommendation that the commanders of course is very important. This is something we can be following closely to the reauthorization process. A very small percentage of the request into the adversaries on the submarines right now and capabilities that we need to be concerned about i dont think that is an area we can afford to be cut. I want to go to another issue on Climate Change. I offered legislation to assess the risk of Climate Change on the military facilities. The list that you sent back to the committee identifying those pieces but the implications are disputable advantages the military installations in the worldwide coastal areas that may be affected by the sea level rise. The hurricanes are an example that cause an estimated 8. 3 billion of damage. Secretary, do you agree that poses a threat to the readiness and ability to achieve military objectives. I agree it has been reported that the army Climate Change poses a challenge for installations. We discovered this in the army. We have to plan to address this to maintain the strong installation will face. I dont think it is affecting the readiness now. Do you agree we need to make investments today to mitigate what we do face in the short, medium and longterm what some of those investments be . Where it is appropriate and we can make a difference, i mentioned marvel and i believe concern about rising tide thats something id like to come back to what we ar but we are makinge investments. Will you commit to working with me and my colleague to determine the appropriate investments necessary i appreciate the contributions to the discussion. The commission is going to outline a strategy of deterrence to protect the nation from the tracktrucks that we face in cyberspace. Will you commit to working with me and congressman one of the cochairs and also senator king and the members of the commission to implement those outlined in the forthcoming Commission Report where we can find agreement and we are practicable . I will work with you on that. Ive gotten feedback o on that effort so thank you for your contributions. In our discussion the other day we had the opportunity and i expressed my concern about the rebalancing potential and i want to express my concern that leaving power vacuums will not go obviously unsettled and we ty look to fill those areas and ask you to work with the committee before any decisions were made sare made sothat they understane and benefit of that rebalancing should it occur. I want to begin by acknowledging theres probably nobody in this room more disappointed than you to secure the border. It is an issue of the National Defense but its the failure to act, not your actions that are resulting in the dollars being taken for the department of Defense Budget. To take the funds to secure the border which has already been upheld by the Supreme Court the failure to act as the failure to actually provide the funds necessary to secure the border. We all know you dont have too much money. You have other resources and responsibilities you would like to apply for funds to. Mr. Secretary want to congratulate you on your comment into focus with respect to china. I participated in this book at events with the atlantic council, the foundation, the hudson institute. I think that your comment made a tremendous difference and i appreciate you participating in speaking out. I also want to thank you for attending it made a tremendous difference. With respect to a space for us and they enterprise. In the defense of the assets as they were fighting domain indicated you didnt want the duplication of the services but you know there are a number of people concerned as it is stepped up not that they might t fit the space force but that their job might and they might instead. If you may actually want to augment and support those who would be helpful and i want to thank you for the work and support for the mms a. We have to debate the fund about what russia is doing and how it is a threat to us because if they are not modernizing the weapon they are creating new ones and that means we create the budget. We had a great visit and they do exceptional work as we organize we are not looking for a duplication and i dont want to create something working so wwe want to ensure we consult with you as things evolve but they do great things so thank you for sharing that with me. You are absolutely correct what they are doing is not just growing but they are creating new capabilities and improving the quality of the force as well. We talk a lot about the Strategic Systems and would often goes is ignored. Or their Tactical Nuclear weapons i called and the unaccountable and nearly 2,000 then they are used in Naval Warfare and thats one thing we have to pay close attention to as low with regards to the strategic forces. As we take a look at this budget we have to look at what they need so we can modernize the forces. We are only modernizing to keep the capabilities that we have and not reach the hypersonic capabilities. Could you give your concern . Is very old in terms of the platform and modernizing. Its important that we get to that by 2030. So it is a reliable, credible, secure Nuclear Force to keep us safe and secure in the 20s, 30s and beyond and that is going to be critical. We are not trying to get into an arms race or match them with them for weapon. To keep them safe and secure and have the different capability in the triad it would be. Thank you mr. Chairman. I want to yield my time to the representative of oklahoma. Thank you mr. Larsen and mr. Sharon and mr. Secretary and general for being here today. Id like to turn our attention to a different issue its a component of the readiness that we have been doing a lot of work on over the last year and that is our military housing. As you are both undoubtedly aware we have significant issues with our Privatized Military Housing Program and we are told the Defense Authorization bill and a number of other things to help address that. In the fy 2021 budget request, there were 54. 6 billion for the military Housing Privatization initiative which is an 82 increase from fy 2020. We know that caring for servicemembers and their families and ensuring that they have safe and livable housing is a critical component of the readiness, and as i understand it, the Department Request for the funds are to help augment staff and quality measures and manage a database. Its guaranteed that the implementation of most of the provisions of the tenets bill of rights for a first but theres a few outstanding issues id like to get insight on and three of the most critical that will not be implemented by the first end of year the maintenance history of the housing unit process and holding a friend because at the airport base in the heart of oklahoma we havent seen tangible improvements in many areas we would like to do the contractors and responsiveness. So i would like to hear from you since weve implemented the bill in the beginning, the timeline making sure the funds are going directly to address these critical issues. We are going to require more assistance or dispute resolution, maintenance history and the provisions, these cases are the reason why we cannot act unilaterally because their legal contract between dod and the mhp i companies in regard to that. We have a pathway on some of these to move forward to find an agreeable way to meet the intent in the spirit if not the letter of the law. Ethical have to come back and work with you all as well to assist because we have legal contracts between them and we want to make sure what i dont want to do is promise of the neck cannot deliver. We have a deliverable right that Service Members can act on because they should live in quality safe housing and what we seen in the past is unsatisfactory. What i would ask of you in general, we have continued work to do on this and i think theres more that we need to do, wherever youre running into roadblocks, weve got to fix this problem that is affecting the health and wellbeing of our Service Members and their families. General millie i want to turn to you, the army initiated a policy of having someone in uniform visiting the housing unit so they could put eyes on the problem, we discovered part of the challenge was a lack of oversight from the chain of command and im wondering when we can expect the other Service Branches to begin to implement this sort of policy. I will come back to you with an actual date but we discussed that amongst the jet country joint chiefs in each of not only just the army but this cnl have all committed to doing that and i trust they are doing that but i get back to you with specific dates of when it will be complete. Thank you very much, are you back the amount of my time. Mr. Roger. Thank you mr. Chairman and take you for your attendance and serviced her country. Secretary and last years nda, we passed a language that was explicit in directing you to assign the Missile Defense agency with the principal responsibility for the development and appointment for hypersonic sensors. The money was put into fund. But yet the money was redirected to the space develop agency. This years funding request, funding responsibility has transferred from nda to fda for the continued hypersonic ballistic efforts. Why . Why is it not being left in india will redirected it to be. My understanding it is that mda, if there is something misdated in our documents i need to get back to you. My understanding and resides at mda, the hypersonic ballistic tracking center as you discuss. They are both obviously closely coordinating on that. But mda did receive the funding for both those things in the twoyear funds. I would ask you to revisit that because it was redirected to sta and nothing has been done on the issue brewed what you know is very important for us. Ive been down and walked to the programs in the past, let me get back to because im getting a different readout from my folks and we can reconcile that. Thank you. You made it clear youre fully committed to a 355 ship navy in order to get that will have to buy smaller shift internships that can be deployed faster braden you also said you say those being lightly meet undermanned, do think you have to get smaller ones into that. I am committed to 355 ship navy but i think we need more than 355 ships. To get there, what the composition needs to change, fewer large platforms, more smaller platforms, we need to have lightly manned to eventually no man. They have to distribute awareness, survivability, they have to be sustainable in the long run, the ability of lethal fire. What we need to do is be much more aggressive in terms of experimenting the prototyping and move to production once we feel confident. We need to have the navy as a greatest force in the world and adopt to the threats that we see prethe two challenges, we need to base it off of the current plan which we do not have and secondly we need to base on it a new joint doctrine. Something that the chairman joint chief of staff is working on. I think that will help inform so were prepared to deal with the challenges we see in the 20s, 30s, 40s and 50s. You emphasize the need for healthy Industrial Base including shipyards. How do you plan to incorporate the shipyards in our Industrial Base. They are critical, not just the yard but when you say the yard the workers as well, i talked to several members how do we give predictability and funding and how do we do those things. I think we need more yards to do the work at a much larger navy and i think its something that we really have to focus on geo data extensive report outlining all the challenges navy is facing in regard to maintenance and both capacity at the yards in the training of the workforce. The Indo Pacific Region is getting a lot of attention forgiven when china, north korea is given to, theres been discussions of rotation of the army specific Pathway Program prior is that something you do across the services or just army. Thats across the services in terms of increasing rotation throughout indo pacific. The strategy driven budget, in the nds, it was in military the main effort, not the only but the main. The preponderance of u. S. Military capability in various forms, forwardbased, station and were rotating through for exercises and appointments is what were trying to do. It applies to all the services not just army. I yield the balance to my time to mr. Cheney if she has a question. I want to echo the concerns and comments of the reprogramming, i want to know if the department has decided contrary to what we heard repeatedly from your predecessors an increase of 3 3 5 annually if necessary to maintain and continue the growth that we seen in rebuilding the budget, thats not what we seen in a for being forced to choose between modernizing our Nuclear Forces in building the submarines, youre not asking for enough money and were not providing you with the kind of regularity that you need. The department the Department Needs 3 5 growth annually if we will implement the strategy. Thank you. Mr. Courtney. Thank you, mr. Chairman and in the spirit of carl vincent i want to talk to two witnesses about the 19 cut to shipbuilding and this years budget. A couple of days ago the Congressional Service looked at the department in the budget and they know more about shipbuilding than anybody in this town combine actually in his understated way and eviscerated this request in the Department Submission this morning is states there are eight ships that are in their budget plan, he actually determined the 31 which was listed we funded and authorized last year. There is actually only seven, two of the seven are tugboats, solid ships, we are not getting briefings in this committee about russian tugboats or chinese tugboats, we in fact a left with five combat and ships. Mr. Secretary, i have been on the Seapower Committee for 14 years. You have to go back to the height of the surge when the Navy Shipbuilding was a bow pair because we had 2000 troops in the lane were in the middle east to see such an anemic sharpening request from the administration here today. I would say this is a punch and then got to shipyard workers, metal traits who are making Life Commitments to learn how to be welders, electricians and carpenters to see the radical weather turn in this years budget in terms of shipbuilding. Its also applied to the got to the supply chain who again weve been coaxing back into shipbuilding after the lean years during the iraq and Afghanistan War to make investments of capital and hiring, they will be on the hill next monday making the rounds vw eckstein from ohio issued a earnings warning, the sole supplier of Nuclear Reactors for navy ships because of that cut to the virginia class program. Lastly is a punch in the gut to the Combatant Commanders. In the last few days weve had general walters of european command talk about a 50 increase in Russian Submarine control operation, we had woody lewis from the u. S. Second fleet talk about the ever increasing number of submarines, admiral davis saying his requirement is met by slightly only 50 of what ive asked for. Again, this budget fails the test in terms of a National Defense strategy which is focused on a near. Commander firscompetitors. You dt like this anytime soon. Just for the record, we are 52 attack submarines today with the retirement of Los Angeles Class submarines which will accelerate over the next four or five years, that fleet will shrink to 44 subs. Your budget keeps us in that trough into the 20 and 30s. Again, a devic defines any anals with the defense strategy. Based on the activities that we are seeing from china and russia, thank goodness the admiral and his unfunded budget priorities, number one on his list which he submitted a couple of days ago is to restore the virginia class the morning so we at least get out of this trough which we will be contending throughout the 2020s and we can get closer to the goal of a 355 ship navy. Mr. Orourkes report which had asked to be in the record make it Crystal Clear that you are projecting out over the next five years it is a cut from the obama projection in terms of fleet size and keeps us further away from getting to the goal of 350 ship navy. Mr. Secretary let me ask a question. Article 10 section 231 of the u. S. Code says when a budget comes over from the department of defense it shall be accompanied by a 30 year shipbuilding plan. This is not a feelgood law. Its because Congress Needs headlights to see where youre going because of the fact that shipbuilding is such a long game. And again, he it is not like helicopters, when you cut you do not get it back. Time is of the essence. We sent a letter to your department on february 12 asking for the thirtyyear showboating plan with did not accompany the budget we still have not seen that shipbuilding plan today. When will we get the shipbuilding plan which is mandated by law . I think all need more time. You might have to take that for the record. A very good and very important discussion. Mr. Courtney, i have not seen the thirtyyear shipbuilding plan for im waiting his presentation to me, is my report, once ive had the chance to review it and they just sit i will follow up on it. At the report. For in time i will share with you what our future for structure should look like. With regard to the first point that you made, i will say this much, i think its a very important issue, im a big believer on attack summaries, i think we need more than what we plan for pretheres two competing pressures, a topline budget which gives us 2 less buying power but the second thing and importantly, i support what the navy did in terms of moving 4 billion from shipbuilding to maintenance. The concern that the acting secretary and i have is we have a navy. Why do i know that, the report dated december blasters said this much, the last five years 75 of our circuit ships never left maintenance on time. 75 half of those ships took over three months to get to see what does not account for. I know this is important but the other members are going to kill me. What that equates to his 19 ships in 2019 unavailable to go to sea. We cannot have a hollow navy, we need a 350 plus ship navy but we cannot have a hollow navy at the same time. Thank you. Take you mr. Chairman and secretary esper and general milley they stand for your service. I realize were in open session and much of the information on military space is classified. But i think its necessary for us to talk in general terms about the threats to our space systems. Weve enjoyed a distinct advantage for decades but now that has been severely tested and challenged. So what actions have you taken to address this threat to our military space, National Security space asset in this budget . Integrate issue we cannot talk about an open session but needless to say were advancing our capabilities and the number of different areas to make sure we can fight in space which is now becoming a war fighting demand. Obviously we have stood up space first, space command, that will give us enhance authority sprayed the president has granted and we are doing our very best in putting a lot of resources into this to make sure we can continue to guarantee our Space Capabilities and what we need from space. Are you confident that the assets we are investing in this budget will stay ahead of and meet the threat . Yes i am. That is good to hear. Let me shift attention to missiledefense funding. Secretary and general said both of our current dmg defense posture can be replied on for north korean threat for the next five or six years beyond that we have to begin assuming increased risk due to their desire to develop their icbm capabilities. Earlier they said given the nature of the Ballistic Missile threat, strong advocate for bringing a layered capability on board for the war fighter before it is fielded. And secretary agreed. Are you in support of an sm3 twoway underlay or some kind of interim to bridge this gap until they come online in a decade or so. Its a matter of principle, we should always have a layered defense, the department is looking at those systems to include enhanced as a way to provide a layer of defense. In all circumstances you typically want a layer of defense. Testing the sm3 three to a would be one way to again to establish the underlayer. It is a system that you have to continue testing to make sure we can do that. With regard to the covenant makes that its an established program nonetheless. On the budget itself, the dollars you are asking for for missiledefense when you subtract things out that have not been in the missileDefense Budget Like Air Force opa are, you come up with a number that is 14 billion in the way i look at it that is 500 thats half a billion less than last years budget. How can we keep pace with the emerging threats if we are cutting that budget . When i look at missiledefense and defeat our numbers, we see a 5 increase in import into that is opr layer and leo and that will give us critical tracking with regard to hypersonic weapons. It is a growth area where we need to invest more with regard to that. Thank you for that. That is all i have mr. Chairman you back to baltimore time. Mr. Secretary thank you for your service but apparently you are not listening. You apparently were not listening to what the chairman and the Ranking Member said about the authority of this committee. With regard to appropriations. I urge you to very carefully consider what has been said this far with regard to the ripoff in regard to the disregard this administration has for the constitution. In the appropriation power of congress. Secondly, in your response to mr. Courtney, you were out of line. The law is quite clear. When you submit your budget, you are to submit the shipbuilding plant and for you to say you will give it to us on your own good time and when you are ready, you are not in line with the law. I let it go with that, you should listen very carefully, you are heading for an major brawl with this committee. Now, my question goes to you chairman milley. The u. S. Government current approach to sealift has yielded aging and an active government fleet. That depends on a shrinking pool of merchant mariners and ships that have trouble getting underway i am concerned that a resilient Maritime Logistics strategy does not exist. And in your job as chairman it seems to me that you are responsible for coordinating all of the necessary elements to achieve a resilient Maritime Logistics program. How are you going to achieve that. Thinthank you, congressman. I would expand on maritime. The issues for the United States to project power overseas appointive crisis in times of need and do it in a timely way. The first with the most sort of thing. We do that fundamentally through sealift and airlift. And both of those areas are strategic ability to do that has been under stress. Over not just lash or the year before but many years. You are right to point out the vulnerability of the maritime fleet and our reliance on other means to try to do this. We can handle the smaller ones no problem. But if you start seriously considering rate power competition, great power war, when you start to seriously consider the nds, those requirements and i think you heard the commander the other day testify recently, then it becomes stress. What are we doing about it . There are lots of studies and analysis and so on and so forth. That is important, we have to figure out exactly what the facts are. But its all about investment and budgets and looking at concepts of the operation and open lands of how we will have to modify with a deck of cards we are dealt. We are not magically going to create a new maritime fleet this year or next year end yet something could happen. So how will we do without and we have a review on going right now amongst the joint chiefs of all the commanders plans and i am the global integrators as you already pointed out per were working through all of that. Its a very difficult situation in a vulnerability that we have and we recognize that we have it and we will try to get it fixed. Thank you, sir, that takes us back to what i brought up with secretary esper. His shipbuilding plant does not speak to this issue at all. There are ways of doing it, they are called sustaining the fight, it talks about the development of a National Fleet which is really the rebuilding of her maritime sector, the private sector, commercial sector in such a way it is useful to the navy for sealift capacity to draw your attention to that and i look forward to working with you on this set of issues. Finally mr. Secretary, obey the law and recognize you are in for a major brawl with a least a good section of this committee as a president continues to ripoff what we are apparently necessary funds preview also indicated in your response and Climate Change that it is not affecting the navy or the military, perhaps i heard you wrong, you might look at norfork or cross the entire spectrum of the military and recognize there is a severe impact already on Climate Change, it will get worse and i urge you to Pay Attention to the current ndaa that requires you as secretary to Pay Attention to this issue in every single part of the military with that i yield back. As i said very clearly, i do recognize impact on military and i mentioned norfork in particular and i mentioned the impact of army bases. Where is it in the budget. The gentlemans time is expired i get the feel this could go on for a while. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Secretary esper i wanted to ask you specifically about sealift, you heard a little on the question but i want to go to september 17 when there was a turbo activation of our sealift capacity trying to exercise what would be a fullscale operational exercise if the call went out the day. Already there are 85 availability as what we are supposed to have, unfortunately we saw the availability was at 40 . We know we have an aging reserve. On average 45 years old, those are older than a number of those members on this committee. We are really pushing the envelope with that. The question only becomes what do we need to do to reestablish, i think some of that is laid out all the more needs to be done. One of the important elements, how do we pay for that, you stated that the strategic necessities for nation, the d21 with responsibility to the air force, the columbia class was the responsibility of the navy since sealift capacity is the ability for the army to get to the site, should it not be the armys responsibility to fund surge sealift capacity. I completely agree with you on the sealift issue, ive been concerned for a few years. We have had multiple conversations as you know, 90 of the army goes by c which is why once i get the 30 year shipbuilding report and get a chance to go through i want to make sure sealift is in there because we have to have that capacity and its a combination of new ships, old ships and other means to do that. It is violating. With regard to your specific question i have not looked at that with regard who should pay that, its traditionally been a navy bill. Each service pays bills they argue should not be theirs in the air force for example does not like the passthrough with regard to a lot of black programs, army has concerns on its front. I think at the end of the day you have to find a solution Going Forward so we can fund the navy that we need and that includes not just surface combatants but the strategic sealift. I think the logistical element of supporting forces, sustaining forces will be key in the strategic environment where all adversaries have to do is look at it and go and say they cannot sustain operations, all those things incredibly important that general milley spoke about. Let me take another step furth further, you her conversation about the 355 ship navy, i think its gotta be there, as you spoke of maybe higher as we look at the different platforms. The key is this years budget, this years budget request as mr. Courtney pointed out, eight ships to tugboats in the decommissioning for alcs is, for cruisers and three ships. I am not very good at math but that math does not add up to me to get to 355, we are heading south on that. Tell me, as we see our adversary china bring on board a brandnew destroyer, very capable ship the class of Aircraft Carriers, is that the direction we need to be going in is the budget reflective of what this nation needs to project power and to do to occur conflict. We need to get on a better trajectory for 350 plus for sure. We need 3 5 annual real growth to help do that. I do support the navys decision to reallocate dollars if you will to readiness because a challenge that they have with getting ships to see and operationally available, i also understand the reason in many cases there putting more money into maintenance to ships than what it would cost Going Forward. Were in a tough situation i want to help the navy as much as possible, acting secretary has made a good call deep within his own budget, about ten or 11 of the navy budget is only dedicated to shipbuilding. I think he will dig did enter deep to find additional funding. I figure mentioned this to you, to have a legislative provision come forward where dod would seek authority to transfer any expired navy funds which otherwise would go to the treasury and have them file back into scn. We think that could generate a billion dollars a year or so and we can punch back into shipbuilding. That the other departments already have available to them. I think its incredibly important to have flexible depraved especially since the demand is going up and dollars going up in level going down. I understand the whole debate back and forth about the Strategic Asset in this nations arsenal. But i think that discussion needs to be had because we had ohio class and that way and when you put a 6 billion ship into the budget and make sissies the time has expired. Thank you. General milley, secretary esper thank you for coming in today. Im going to shift my first question away from some of the things that weve been talking about im very much involved to make sure work fighters get the best available tool comes from number of areas on Industrial Base who supports them in our human capital, the employees department of defense. Secretary esper on january 29, President Trump authorized you to eliminate collectivebargaining in the dod and to delegate that authority to any Senate Confirmed official in the department, the president cited perceived threats to National Security and the department flexibility to adapt new technologies as justification for this. Dod civilian workforce are some of the greatest employees in the world. We know what they do day in and day out. Ultimately, our National Security is bolstered by those employees. We talk about that. Do you plan to exercise this authority to provide the president to exclude the defense of civilians . First of all we do have a great dod workforce in my multiple iterations to the pentagon i had to work with them and i am one of them, integrate workforce, we rely for the continuity and expertise that are critical to sustaining our military. You are right, the executive order was issued late january and working its way through the system right now, it has not come to me with any recommendation or analysis and i know its in the process, that is all i have right now. Did you request somebody on your behalf i did not request that. You have any idea why they came up. I do not. Can you point to our time in the recent history where that might be employed . I was going back through labor history, i did not see any issues, i have never heard of it from anybody but the folks that you want to be part of your team could be potentially eliminated because of this order that a partly came out of nowhere and if you cannot think of a reason why it mightve been done in the past and i dont know of any, how is it showing up. Because i cannot recall an issue right now does not mean one does not exist. The thing for me too do is wait to see what the analysis is and comes up for my staff and what they are looking at and make an assessment from there based on what the recommendations are made. When you get that report we would love to have that shared with us. The idea of creating potential havoc when we work well together seems rather crazy. I only have a few minutes, i want to bring up something they alluded to. We have early retirement for the case 135s and kc tens. About four years ago said in this very room, what keeps him up at night are the refuelings. We know the issues with the kc46, there appears to be a gap that is going here. But i believe you are very close to having the bloom in the visual system but regardless of what the system is it will be a period of three years possibly, why will we be retiring more refueling when we are building up the capacity to need those . Its a great issue, an issue that is not sexy, a strategic but utterly important, i was on a 46 last week and sat in the front of the airplane and the issues with the remote vision system and talked about all the issues and the head of air force acquisition thinks a solution is inside that it will take some time. At the same time i have the exact discussion about what does that do to a growing gap. I think general lyons will come to me, probably the chairman and make recommendations that maybe we should not retire some tens or 135s until we get a better assessment of how long it will take to get that fixed in place. I look forward to hearing on them its a call we maintain that capability, this also gives back into the reason why am doing cocoms. Theyre using tankers for various missions and at their missions not important or not highpriority, i close an additional increase in supply and reduce demand. [screams] reconsidering contracting. I would like to rely on general lyons to bring me what we can entertain. So we dont have a gap that impacts our National Security. Thank you. Thank you gentlemen, i appreciate your service. Clearly where Great Power Competition with china and were assessing the threat, National Defense strategy lays out the concerns and strategies but a vulnerability that we have is in our pharmaceutical industry as we know our National Supply of antibiotics and vaccines and many other drugs depends on chinese manufacturers and chinese pharmaceutical producers provide 97 of the u. S. Antibiotic market. So general milley can you expand a little bit more on the vulnerability to our military as it relates to our dependence on chinese for pharmaceutical. As you well know, weve got a military radical system and we have access to all the same drugs available in the commercial system et cetera. And you point out that the vulnerability to have a country such as china manufacturing high percentages, i dont know if its 97 or 80 or whatever it is but i know type percentages of the ingredients to the american pharmaceutical industry across the country both military and civilian. It is a vulnerability. In times of Armed Conflict if that were to ever happen, hopefully that would never happen, that would obviously be a significant vulnerability to the u. S. It is something that we need to address as a nation, theres vulnerability on us as a military but also as a society. Thats great i appreciate that. We have a bill that would dod to look further into this threat and to pursue American Pharmaceuticals to make the supply available for our military. I look forward to working with you on that. Secretary esper, i wanted to talk about in 2019 congress authorized a Defense Infrastructure Program to address deficiencies in Community Infrastructure that will enhance the military value and resilience, the quality of life for military installation and in the fiscal year 2020 congress appropriated 50 million for this program to be managed and executed by the office of economic adjustment yet today the department has yet to release guidelines or details about the process by which communities will be able to propose projects and compete for funding under this program and have communities in my district that are very excited about this program and ready to apply, they just need the information, the guidance. Can you share an update on when they can expect the guidance and are you committed to this program. Thinking for raising that. I actually received several letters i reviewed recently and asked of the team what is this and whats going on so i got a quick briefing, my understanding they will be delivering recommendations with implementation in a couple weeks. A month or so, then we can move forward in terms of implementing the law and expanding the appropriation as. That is great. We also have challenges in our country with respect to the capability and capacity as you know our stockpiles of high demand precision has been significantly reduced over the last 15 years. We have been trying to address this but i was wondering secretary esper as well as general milley if you could talk about your assessment of where we stand right now with our precision guided as far as the risk that were facing right now and what steps are you taking to adjust encounter this risk. Another important issue it does not get much attention, i get updated on regularly with the status of key munitions. Theres areas we need to put more money into, we did in this budget cycle, i also sent a message to our allies and partners that they need to procure their own in many cases there depending on us and i said that will not be available for them. I think its something that we have to of focus on a put money against. Its not sexy but its critical important we have availability to the assets and an extended period of time, if you get into shooting match you cannot produce munitions quick enough. Exactly. There is supply chain issues as well. What is the reaction of realities as you said we need to step up. This is a case for too long we have not told them the truth with regard to what the expectation should be. By the way for them to do that would not only make them more whole but take the burden off of us, it would help her own industries. Remain healthy and be able to reinvest and recapitalize. I think this is a message im trying, i discussed it with many allies to procure their own items. Thank you very much. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary if the president were declared a National Emergency over Climate Change would he be able to program money using existing transfer authority . I do not know congressman. With there be a limit how much he could have the pentagon paid to the National Emergency. Is speculative and im not a lawyer. You are that the secretary of defense and they reprogrammed a lot of the money away from us. Do you have an opinion. Thats legally available because the d d lawyers in the house lawyers have advised me it is legally available. Is legally available because the president has declared an border is an emergency, if we have any other president declaring a random doing think and be at that point. I will not speculate. In that case you also would not speculate what accounts will be available to be pure program, ships, military construction, all of that should be fair game according to the ideology the president is using in terms of programming. I will not speculate. General milley, your advice then, the recent reprogramming notification we receive taken money away from what you previously briefed as Department Needs, does that constitute a threat to the nation now that we have reprogram the money . On this particular case i was asked to conduct a formal assessment, i did that and submitted it in writing and in short what i said was the program on after 20 billion was not a significant immediate strategic negative impact to the overall defense of the United States of america. Those were precisely selective words. So strategic and overall. Its a half of 1 of the overall budget so i cannot and consciously it is significant, immediate, this guy is falling in will be a detriment to defend herself. We can defend the United States of america. I did a Risk Assessment and thats what i said. Thank you general. Lets move on to the Army Headquarters in europe. Ill start with secretary esper. I was pleased with the fifth quarter, i understand the focus on her interest in National Security in europe. I think we all here applied that. Without a doubt. But my question is, if this is european focus, why was it made to be based in fort knox. That have to refer you to the army for the answer. I dont know why they chose that is the basic location. I dont know if you have any insight. Is an army and the rule sets that we operate by the Service Secretary but having said that a short while ago the chief staff of the army was discussed that its been out there for quite a while, the entire decisionmaking process. The bottom line, do you want a permanent force or rotated, with the needs of the commander. The consensus and decision was made with water fully involved in the decisionmaking, its best to have a conus base and rotate forward a small command post that can move around to various countries within europe rather than be tied to a given base and have a big structure put in europe. That was a logic and thats what we decided to base in the United States and the army decided fort knox. Was there an analysis between heaven in europe and other places in europe and here . I would say yes, i would have to check with secretary mccarthy for final analysis. I would say yes because it is part of the process of basing decisions. Along with Environmental Impact statements and other things, the entire checklist of requirements to do a decision and costbenefit analysis. Just to drill down a little deeper. When doing a costbenefit analysis between europe or European Headquarters and conus, there was an actual analysis of european potential sites, not just automatically excluded from the costbenefit analysis. I cannot answer that specifically but i would say at a broader level him for several years i have been an advocate within in permanent basing in foreign countries. The fourth protection is a key part of that but also expense, its very expensive to have us, u. S. Military with their families et cetera in schools and commentaries and all that. Its an operationally much more useful if the combined commander can move forces run quickly without thinking about having to think of taking them away from the family for two or three weeks, if you do plan a rotational basis as a soldier sailor or marine, youre much more flexible if youre operating on a rotational basis, thats for the army went to the brigades to rotating to korea. Im an advocate the gentlemans time has expired. Im an advocate for rotating forces forward. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Secretary esper, i dont necessarily blame this on you but we appreciate your assistance. We received your testimony sometime around 5 00 p. M. Yesterday afternoon, just shortly before that i know you have to submit your testimony to opm and they have to approve it before comes to the committee staff. Obviously with your history you understand when we receive it at 5 00 p. M. Or thereabouts in the hearing as the next morning attending and that is become more commonplace and not and we would appreciate your help in having those reports submitted in a more timely matter, some of us most of us personally read them and if not to get the time to read them, somebody in our Office Points out the highlights. I was unaware about that we want to get it to you on time for sure. You mention the s35 versus the a10, my understanding is that a report was due at the end of 2019 from the operational Evaluation Office in person between f35 in the a10 on the air mission. Is that report been completed . I honestly do not know. I can give you a comparison for my own personal experience having not called in Close Air Support from an f35. In a10s agree wit weapon systm free when it comes to postair support, we on the ground dont care where it comes from as long as it shows up. All of these Weapon Systems are very, very effective, the a10 is proven extraordinarily effective in afghanistan and iraq. But the f35 for the next generation you look a Great Power Competition itself 35. Absolutely but from a to 182 and 220 rounds of ammunition. Roger that. In prior National Defense acts and appropriation members when you prohibit going down of the a10 until the dod could convince this body, the legislative branch of the government that the f35 was capable of handling the Close Air Support mission and the one thing that is not mentioned in either of your testimonies is the fact that you proposed a drawdown 44 of the current eight tens that are in the inventory i dont want to decisions like that im not going to get into the secretary but from a device to a point, there is a fundamental issue at stake and is coming up in a lot of areas whether its tankers or maritime or ships, whatever it is, its a question of divest to invest. Were at a pivot point in my opinion, my military assessment were at a pivot point to the character of war in the geopolitical landscape is crating in the world today prove we have to make fundamental choices and to lay down the markers of what the future military will look like five or ten years. If we dont make the hard choices, then we will be on the short end of the stick ten years from now. If i could, the decision between the bad and the worst in budget decisions between the needs and the needs more, my concern from what i see from the department as we give up a Weapon System that is aske actually efficientd effective in hopes we will have one better at some point in the future. In the private sector nobody would give up the system that worked until the replacement system had proven itself. Both capable and efficient and i know you are about to make a statement. I know because youre short on time, just like the navy did with older ships. What the air force is trying to do is retire aircraft, its not just some a tent but tankers and be ones and f15s. I dont think are trying to retire older aircraft that cost more to maintain and operate. I dont think with the air force is doing was not a statement about the a10, it was a statement about retiring legacy across. A bms in robbins airport base at the gruesome predecision. If youd had abov better pot for fruit as time goes on, and considered about an article that i read, this is the article, 80 ms cannot be the sole solution for the army air first. There are three generals quoted in the article, general wesley, general gallagher and general bassett under bassett expressing their concerns of the 80 ms platform not being able to deliver for the Ground Troops. The gentlemans time is expired. Your point has been made. That would be great. Im going to take a hard look at that. Thats an ongoing discussion. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I cannot agree more with your statement that were at a pivot point where we have to modernize our approach to National Security. Do you believe in the whole government approach to National Security . 110 yes. Secretary mattis said if you dont fund the state department fully then i need to buy more ammunition. Do you agree with that . I do i think we need to fund the interagency in places like africa where the interagency brings a lot to the game. Thats where im going. To quote again from secondary mattis, you have to make certain that your foreignpolicy is led by the diplomats by the military. Do you agree with statement . Mr. Secretary what is the state departments opinion on the blank slate review on africa. They supported, ive had a number of conversations with secretary pompeo in regards to the process and going through, my aim thats illuminating because i was in east africa and every single motor officer and state Department Official i spoke to on the ground said that we should both increase state department and dod funding and effort for africa. Your blank slate review is not really a blank slate because only options on the table are reducing our commitment to africa. Is that correct . That is not correct. I approved an increase for recently for Security Forces at mandalay bay. If her looking at a variety of options and predominantly one to make productions right now. Is a fundamental disagreement between you and the commander. He briefed me there reducing the presence. If they ever propose of increase i would look at anything. It is a blank slate review and i cannot speak to what state department is doing with regard to how they look at the situation. The state Department Says i have not been asked. You might suggest, secretary pompeo asked his people on the ground what they think. I do know in 2018 president prei announced they will provide 60 billion to africa and china has surpassed the u. S. As their largest trading partner. Their troops on the ground in africa for the First Time Ever so we have a rising threat from china to me on the ground in africa. This is what im trying to look at, make sure were properly positioned in right side to deal with competition. My senses right now focus may be too much on counterterrorism, i want to get the balance right regard to forces, it is not a purely mission. It requires a whole government approach. The third thing, we cannot play mantoman defense with the chinese and russians and africa. We have to be thoughtful in regard to how we allocate our resources whether the multidiplomats. I cannot agree more. Ill never be able to meet the demand. I could not agree more. Matt of texas asked if congress is military budget would matter or whether you and owen b would reprogram money for the border wall that the president wants in congress has not in our Constitutional Authority authorized. You failed to answer the question you say you hope they will be partners. Does the word partners occur in the constitution describing congress and the Committee Budgetary authority . Not that im aware of. After you were nominated to be secretary of defense, the greatest military in the world i was pleased to see a smart and accomplished professional and National Security, fellow infantry officer. Someone who i worked with personally on a number of issues selected to succeed secretary mattis. One question to you, secretary mattis left big shoes to fill, the most import think he did was willing to stand up to the president. To disagree with donald trump when he proposed doing things against the National Security interest of the United States and our troops. We all know that trump a great contrast to yourself and the chairman who served our country for decades has often done things in his own personal or political interests against the National Security entrance or the wellbeing of her troops. Mr. Secretary, have you been willing to not disagree but to stand up to the president . I will not speak to my personal conversation but i can assure you the president welcomes opposing views because what he seeks and advice is a wide range of opinions and can help you make the best choices. When you took this job did you take an oath to the constitution. To the United States i taken us several times over my 40 years of professional life. It must be very difficult to reconcile having lived with the west point honor code, that no called thcadet should lie cheatl or tolerate those that do when working for this president. I yield back. Mr. Sonic. Mr. Chairman i want to take a moment to remind members of the committee and the rules of the house given the questions asked denigrating the president. But moving on i went to focus my question on Missile Defense both you secretary asper and you chairman milley are aware of the 2019 Missile Defense review, it states that building a new gdi in the continental United States would add interceptor capability against the potential missile threats to the homeland including a future iranian capability. The decision to do so in the election will be informed particular emerging threat condition. So my question is knowing that we are facing emerging threats whether tehran not abiding by their restrictions of the jcpoa, the ongoing status of north korea, the cancellation of the redesigned kill vehicle, the ten year delay, these are all pertinent factors when it comes to our emerging threats. And the conditions we are facing. With this be a requirement from your perspective for third interceptor site . What i would like to do is take that back to my staff both military uniform to get their assessment. Obviously threat driven, some of the sites. But it is threat driven, i probably warrants an update to find out if circumstance of change on the ground with regard of iran and doesnt want to relook or an update assessment. Chairman milley, i would like your assessment of the threat as you look to the future for missiledefense. Basically the same thing, its too early to tell with respect to iran whether the need is there yet or not. We do know as of today a Ballistic Missile and Nuclear Weapon tested by iran. But we dont know what the future will hold. Its something were under constant evaluation specifically what youre talking about is a missiledefense and array of defenses like specific on the east coast. Were taking a hard look at it, the decisions are not yet made but wielded back to sacred defense. As you know mr. Secretary it was the preferred location for an east coast missiledefense. In the 2019 mbr it is direct studies that should be conducted for missiledefense to include of an east coast site, is study complete, are we able to share the results, if not when can we expect those results. Thats a great question, i dont have the answer, let me take that back and get back to you. Really important for my district and very important for the missiledefense discussion. Shifting gears, i wanted to ask about coronavirus. Last night u. S. Forces korea confirmed the first case of a soldier with coronavirus. Giving them a test is asian we are seeing with around the world whether italy or the middle east, how is dod addressing this and particularly what your perspective on the potential impact for the joint training exercises and overall readiness. First of all, the command have established plans for dealing with things like this and im sure the chairman can speak to that in the first of february as the submerged i saw on the Campaign Plan all the operations to the coronavirus, the commander has been implementing that, we meet daily, my team, also the Interagency Team working this in between him and ost staff, we have issued a variety of memorandums advising the force on how to deal with coronavirus, the tools in the tool kit, we continue to respond to requests for information in the commanders in this case. I get frequent updates with regard to whats happening. We are taking a look at all of this. My First Priority is protection of our people, both Service Members and family and make sure to accomplish our mission. Those are the two priorities for me and third i want to make sure we can support the interagency of the deity and what we bring to the table. A to see what those are. More broadly i want to put this in context the coronavirus is very serious and in the department we are taking a we are taking all kinds of appropriate precautions. We have implemented all kinds of i apologize, mr. Chairman. The time is expired. Thank you mr. Chairman. The president s budget request funding to begin phase one for the 93 nuclear warhead. However they referred to, quote, the next warhead estimated what they want and need funding until 2023. I have a threepart question. Why has the timeline shifted by two years, number two does the Department Planned to maintain the others in the submarine and they 76176 to and the w. 88. Number three, its extended only a few years ago and both will last a decade. Why the rush . I would have to refer you over on those questions. Maybe number two i can help on that there is certainly one and three i dont have to answer for for you at this point in time. I would appreciate the followup. Followup. Let me continue with you as we all know its expected to expire february 2021, just one year. What are the risks for allowing it to expire without replacement as negotiating extension a priority for the administration this year . The administration to discuss the way forward we hope to engage on that soon and beyond that there is nothing i can add the question you asked. That is concerning. While, let me continue with general milley. The philippines is a treaty ally of the United States and a partner in our efforts to fight against terrorism. The u. S. Agreement and enhanced defense Cooperation Agreement as a sign of our Defense Partnership with the Government Note determination have you been in contact with your counterpart on next steps in the u. S. Philippine defense relationship and number two of this decision impact our freedom and navigation operations in the south china and the ability to conduct terrorist organizations. We have concerns about the notifications to terminate and its a sixmont sixmonth notifn for the six months to work it out. If it is implemented and this is a sixmonth notification if that is implemented then it would have an impact on the posture and are exercises in a wide variety of others. We want access based on those sort of things. Philippines is key. We had a longstanding relationship and we want to keep our visiting forces agreement in place if possible. That would be a decision that we think its an important thing for the mutual defense and in the United States. Thank you and i will yield back. Im very concerned about the security of the southern border to make sure we are only letting folks friendly in the United States and that being said, i think that we risk a whole lot with a 3. 8 billion reprogramming to fund a border wall without consulting with congress. At a minimum i think it would be much easier and for shortterm progress with usbased discuss with the chair and Ranking Member what they are going to reprogram and how. I think if you discussed it with us today that would make it a whole lot more palatable to all of us. That being said, im supportive of the president s policy on the border but we have to be careful. I want to talk about the 3. 8 billion. The National Guard is 40 of the combat, yet the cut in the reprogramming is 3. 8 billion is 1 billion or 30 of the budget. That is alarming because if we rely on them to be able to play tomorrow as the general said over and over again weve got to get them in the fight and what we are doing is taking away the ability for them to keep pace with our active component counterparts with equipment. Please tell me they were planning on making sure that the guard and reserve will continue to be an Operational Force with these cuts in future cuts. The guard reserve are very important critical components of the total force whether it is army or air force. Everywhere i travel around the world i see them Standing Shoulder to shoulder with active duty. Im sure the chairman will speak to it to maturity of the tools and equipment. I knew that from both of you. Thats what i was hoping. The second part is because the future is command which i think is the absolute way we need to start acquisition and its a great program. The development we are doing great things in the future is command. What concerns me is when i see the tax charge for the building there are no guard reserves in the building. We need to make sure that they do not field nextgeneration stuff to the active component and then get the left behind to the guard and reserve. When we look at the systems, and i dont think there is a proportionality thing. The last time we discussed this in the rules and certainly the general and the secretary agreed i recall the National Guard units being some of the early fielders of the apartment we were considering. I just got back with senator and a half and i can tell you every president and Prime Minister we met with, all th the militariesd state department folks we met with, we do not need to reduce the number of troops that they have. Its a great Economy Force nation and i think we get a great return for investment. I think we have real threats both terrorist and we need to be judicious making sure we dont reduce the amount of troops we keep them the same or invest a little bit more to make sure because the return on investment is great. The final thing i will say is the hope that we will continue to stay committed and work with the state department on the programs. We are losing opportunities that we cannot regain for the next 30 years when all of us will be long gone out of the government. I need to continue to invest and not be so quick to take them off the list. You are correct i think that is the best investment a country can make. Its not just states to allocate where we needed as well and thats a great investment for the country and the more we can do, the better. Im excited that not only did the chairman raise the issue but you see that there is bipartisan interest and it is probably the most weve talked about outside of the Posture Hearing of all the earrings i participated in the committee. I want to highlight it isnt and there is a diversity of challenges. I was interested in the comment that the general made at the end of january i think before the senate. He said we recognize the strategic environment is changing and the joint force must orient against china and russia even as those threats inn america. In africa to fight is a key component of the power competition as these efforts are not mutually exclusive so my question we think indochina and ratings are up. I would like you to kind of describe to the committee in as much detail as you can wha withs Great Power Competition with china and russia and is there an intersection or not . It is global but we will just focus on china. We see china as busy in south america and frankly in every continent. I want to go right to africa. You see them in certain countries may be trying to catch Port Authority an authority ando Critical Materials so that is happening not through all of africa but many critical parts so as we look at the continental 53 countries we have to ask is important to us and make sure we sustain that. In a letter that i wrote along with my colleagues, a bipartisan letter you did respond and i appreciate it and you mentioned today about the substitution for the 101st airborne. The Commander Brigadier general commented recently that they dont have the military structure like they do in afghanistan with the supply chains readily available. What are we doing to ensure that it has the infrastructure they need to do their job . They are ideally suited and we will make sure we have what they need to get the job done. Special operators do a great job out there in sparse conditions. Based on the prioritization of the country National Security interest it i isnt special Operation Forces they knew that going into it and volunteered for the end they are specifically trained or prepared to assist and accompany Indigenous Companies so they conduct their mission and that is the mission they dont give all the others that they are capable of operating. I completely understand the general made those comments because he does have concerns about the infrastructure support Logistic Support that he will get while hes on the ground and unlike what we demand in other places, we cannot ask them to put the bill because they are broke. Talking about the shipbuilding pla plan ive delid an assessment that was tough but fair and i think reflects bipartisan frustration about the different structure weve had and the lack so i would like to clarify something that you said in response you havent seen the shipbuilding plan. Can you clarify that because there was a report yesterday that you had been giving the plan but were awaiting that plan coming from and this is all in the spirit of we want to see the plan and get your vision for what the future fleet looks like and work with you. The integrated assessment at a lot of questions coming out of that and that is not the 30 year shipbuilding plan lets get on the schedule tell me what your plan is. My own internal think tank has a plan to get the 355 plus and theres great work going on. In the year 2030 and beyond what i said is i want to get all these ideas together, get innovative thinking and levels the Playing Field and run these plan and see which one really optimizes what we need in the future. The other one is going to take time. I want to make sure we recognize and present to you a right plan and not just something that was generated and delivered on time. It is an innovative and takes every consideration to include the surge and they left you have been briefed that you are going to balance that off against an alternative as well as outside thinkers that will be a document. We have plans right now, the 21 plan and the ten to 15 year plan and as we know the further you go ou the less credible they become. There are some questions with regards to this but i am concerned about. It hasnt worked for years so why should we assume it will work in the future. When i present you with a plan it is the one i feel confident with at the chairman feels confident we think that this is where they should be in the future. I know that this is a very competitive process but can you give any timeline of when we can expect to be briefed on that i know you are looking over at the colleague and made comments in the past trying to Bring Congress into the process. I want to move quickly in a matter of a few short mom is and find they can invite interested members to look at the process of what we are doing it just because im. To help inform this because this is that maybe they are going to sell and fight and i just want to kind of open up the way is to get the best assessment from everybody to include interested members. I want to commend what you said earlier your hunch about where the fleet needs to go into scholarships experimenting if you can make a geopolitically and International Politics case to the committee i think youd find a lot of support notwithstanding the concerns that the chairman and others have articulated. That is my ambition like i said i maybe be a leade may be e tax us to veto tax ups. Thank you mr. Chairman, mr. Secretary and generals for your service. As you know, we were with the delegation which Speaker Pelosi and the publication was unified in echoing the message that European Countries shouldnt be using a. One of the things the United States should be doing is allowing medium and low rates spectrums to be used to develop an alternative like that spectrum isnt as sufficient. My question for you is have you considered that and what do you think we need to do with either other industries to help develop alternatives and whether he you would be willing to come out at the defense innovatio defense in Silicon Valley to discuss some of the strategies . Im trying to make a trip out to speak to them so yes, for sure. We have a lot of Great Companies that provid provide great produd im very concerned and spoke about it publicly in munich as did the speaker. The dod is investing hundreds of millions of dollars to set up prototypes. The last thing that i would say a lot of companies at least want to go to the bed and grange which is 313550 megahertz whether it is the army and Marine Corps Air Defense Systems the private sector wants that and we needed that and we are willing to share that. That is the best way to move forward to meet priority in a National Security priority. For encryption your department understandably and i think rightfully talked about the importance of encryption. Some people are saying lets have a backdoor and i think from this perspective i dont really understand that. If you were to tell apple would you really want to risk having apple have that technology that could be hacked and then have access to every phone in the country or in the world and so it seems they have different approaches to encryption. It says encryption is important. The attorney general is asking apple or other companies to create a backdoor key. Basically any employee if you create this key would be able to break into any phone at who knows i guess i just would wonder if we are working with the Justice Department to work on the National Security implications of having this to encryption. I dont know the views on the Law Enforcement side. They have to approve every increase in troops around the world. Obviously that is asking a lot for congress to be able to do that. That is there a way congress can be more involved in understanding exactly where the troops are and that decisions about how many the of you are sending and why ask i think in the longstanding prerogative i do know we have systems where we notify you of deployments. I would have to check and see buthat it is my understanding. Thank you mr. Chairman and mr. Secretary i. Want to thank you for your recent visit to the district after my constituents were attacked ueberroth called and comfort and ive been very encouraged by our discussions but the dothat the dod is doingg necessary to ensure we have a productive, safe working environment for our servicemembers and the servicemembers we hosted the foreign countries, so thank you for that very progress. I also want to thank you for the development of the budget seems to prioritize our near peer adversaries. There are enhancements in the research and evaluation dollars. It is an unparalleled range of this money in the budget to enhance the ranges, and it is my hope that the department will continue to maintain a strong position opposed to offshore oil drilling which isnt consistent with the launching of experimental missiles which is something i believe i have to say out loud. Thank you for the great work. As the department is raising its leadership to meet those challenges is notable to me weve they conflicted from what was u. S. Involvement in a Syrian Civil War with tremendous sectarian violence and in this budget he presented to us is there an expectation that the nation would reengage in this civil war there hasnt been the discussion about this. We think the best path forward is underway and that needs to be pursued vigorously into the situation has become a lot more complicated given the many actors. To maintain their own resistance that have resources to do that is our expectation to reinsert the border in the area where americans were previously withdrawn. The Current Mission is to ensure the continuing defeat devices in that portion working alongside our partners that happens on a daily basis at this point in time i dont see any likelihood that we would be back along the border. That is great news. The only correct decision in your mind for the president could have made is the decision the president in fact did think to take the tens of millions on the border and remove them from the conflict zone. Is that still your position . Great news. I very much look forward to the Trump Presidency being one where we end our involvement in the war rather than reigniting the new conflicts in places for newfound reasons that distract us from the important National Security strategy focused that i think the two of you have played quite dutifully. Its appropriate to look back at the positions the congress has made supported by most of the members of the Committee Republican and democrat to disengage for the civil war and in the claus claws of the resoln that says where is an abrupt withdrawal of the personal from certain parts is beneficial to the adversaries of the United States government. I wonder if you concur with that statement or now in the benefits hindsight we can see that disengaging from that conflict was beneficial to the United States government and our position. I think from a military standpoint, we have two special forces they were going to come across the border and they were afraid to come across the border and have very real choice to remove them from the avenue of attack. Given that decision are we sensing that there is an insurmountable resurgence of isis we are not prepared to deal with as a consequence of the decision . The caliphate has been eliminated and they have an organization that is not yet destroyed. Theyve broken down into strong groups and are continuing to conduct terrorist operations a very disparate to segregated way but its no longer the threat that they were just a year ago. It is inconsistent under the administrations. Im concerned with the plan to move forward basing the troops in south korea and maintaining operational readiness given a tension associated with an expired special measures agreement. The administrations demanded south korea increase its payments to the u. S. By 400 in a Public Statement questioning whether or not the president of u. S. Troops in south korea is even in our interest. How does it positively impact the National Security . The that requires for seven decades now to prevent an outbreak of another korean war. You can never prove why something didnt happen that i would argubut iwould argue thats have detoured the north korean aggression. The prevention of that is in the u. S. National security interest for general stability and also global stability. It is a treaty agreement maintaining u. S. Forces. What policies are in place to prevent a potential escalation of hostilities showed an act be perceived by either side towards the other on the tactical level and can you identify any potential gaps in communication between the Senior Leaders on either side of the operation were to the strategic levels to de escalate potential situation should arise . We maintain Communication Systems so theres inadvertent incidence that couldve been escalate. I know the secretary does as well and the commander has channels of communications at the broad geostrategic level it is in our interest to continue to maintain adequate forces at the end of the day that goes towards the great competition. We want to continue the legacy of maintaining the peace. One more question about china and what area is the peoples republic investing in terms of military capability and how are we countering their investments . In a specific classification i think that china since the reform of 1979 they made huge economic advances over the last 40 years with that history tells us that countries tend to develop a very significant military capability and that is the case with china so with all of the domains, space, cyber we develop those significantly over the course of the last 40 years. They are not our peer yet but their objective is to be a coequal and even surpass the United States militarily. Theyve said that publicly and thats what this is all about his effortabout as theefforts te closing the gaps were overtaking some of the capabilities. There have been improvements since the military became an all volunteer force after 1973. Theres still some representation in the rain is. What specific steps his department is taking to maintain the officers so that it better reflects the population demographics and im running out of time so i can take that for the record. Let me get back with details. More than any other institution we have a very diverse officer corps workforce that we can and should do better. Im optimistic about the role the National Security and non traditional Defense Companies can play in the emerging technologies. Its one of the domains that is attracting a great deal of commercial innovation and while i am encouraged by the establishment of the Space Force Im disheartened by the regulations that create barriers to entry for small spot Startup Companies with a massive bureaucracy. An opportunity to revitalize the approach what can be done to reorganize to include more new Innovative Companies in the ecosystem of the so much of the innovation is out there with a small provider and thats why we stood up to check into that. We published an update and we will bring new ideas because we have challenges some required by law and weve had a lot of reforms in terms of prototyping. The biggest challenge is cultu culture. Theres a lot of success and ideas and thats where we are going to get the best. To rewrite everything is one of the reasons to find different ways to fulfill the capabilities. The department identified Artificial Intelligence as one of the technologies that warrant additional. With the Lieutenant General theyve been impressed in the leadership across the services and open relationships with industry and academia. With his pending retirement i want to express what are you doing to ensure the continued leadership of Artificial Intelligence in the department and in the joint center specifically . We need to find a replacement to carry on the good work because it is a game changer out there. They stood u up the task force f Carnegie Mellon and at the same time we are using the authority to bring more people from the outside into the system so we can tap into that and they have good plans to continue that and we are growing as quickly as we can to beat those needs. We have heard a great deal from a number of experts against using genetic testing kits they potentially create consequences and risk to the force and mission. I wonder if you can comment about the possible National Security implications of an adversary like china gained access to the genetic makeup of the servicemembers. Theres a lot of things the chinese are working on. When you expose any type of personal identity information that can be exploited yet we know that the chinese have extracted thousands if not millions of records a couple years ago and everything from thing or prince if multiple is the ability to exploit you as an individual and theres all kinds of other things that can be done and to identify where ever the case may be. Thank you all for being here today i want to associate myself with colleagues with my concern about moving appropriated money towards the border wall my questions are a little bit more money they have a lot more to do with regards to the committees that i serve on specifically. If they had a sixmonth wait list in order for me to access the child. So one of the things i see with the presence division of 51 of us we need to be able to allow women and their families to be able to bring themselves to work so we can support these activeduty women and families in the pursuit of their career so they can be ready so with the Record Number entering would you be able to share with the committee is doing and what aspects to ensure mechanisms exist for child care and right now for child care less for upwards of a year. Weve got to do a better job. The child care and spouse the services are investing in child care. I signed a new policy that elevated military kids in terms of getting the priority care. Then more flexibility in terms of the care that to me is the next challenge. Once we can get to those new faces and thats what i hear from the servicemembers and their spouses. I look forward to working with you on this issue. I helped found the caucus and we are about 50 some strong right now the first to focus on these issues and the last cycle we have some amendments that were successful investigating this issue and im really concerned about it as we increasingly have more in more we need to be focused on that. Did you have anything that he wanted to adyouwanted to add th . There are a series of policies that can be improved and fun aupon as you mentioned prioritized in and that is going to make a big difference in terms of the way this. Ive been for years now in the military and theres probably nothing more important than for the soldier, sailor and marine so its a critical area that we all recognize. I want to talk a little bit more about readiness and im also an engineer one proposal was part of the nda and established a policy to maintain and promote the talent into digital expertise. The bill was enacted into 30th last year and isnt supposed to be until may i heard reports on it but i wanted to know if you have anything you could report on god and specifically it also included authorization that would be effectively appointed did you intend on appointing that and have you made progress . I will tell you this much its important and critical in terms of Artificial Intelligence we have a deficit of people with the background oabackground of d engineering skills. That is one of the things we need someone looking for any authorities that can bring people in and do things outside of the normal to make sure to maintain that type of valuable talent. I will go ahead and get the rest of my questions for the record and they would yield back. Thank you mr. Chairman. Thank you very much mr. Secretary, we are hearing reports that as the United States is prepared to sign a deal with television shortly that it may in fact include secret annexes or side deals, can you give assurances that big a commitment any deal in the United States will be made public in its entirety . I would defer to the state department. Are you aware of any contemplation nothing comes to mind right now. We will be raising it as well. Its crucial to the United States not go down the path we saw and the secretary was effective with the nuclear deal uncovering the annexes and side deals with respect to iran. Any deal the United States would contemplate should be made public in its entirety. On the same topic we have seen reports that one of these annexes may in fact include a plan for counterterrorism cooperation for some sort of center with the taliban. Will you give the committee your assurance that you recognize the lunacy protecting the television as a partner. You are quoting things that i havent seen. I will take a look at what ever annexes are out there and i have strong feelings and opinions and long experiences so i do give you my commitment im going to give all of this a hard look. I am not aware of anything described. Is it your best military advice that the taliban is not an effective partner for counterterrorism . Here is my view on the whole thing. Signing the Peace Agreement fully recognizing the question is making sure with a virtual puzzlwhatever chirpedlevel we h. It continues to fight with al qaeda. I would also like to get your commitment and military advice about which the commitment and an agreement with the taliban for the complete withdrawal of the u. S. Forces. It would undermine the allied with the afghan governmen goveri know president tony specifically asked us not to make that kind of commitment it would clearly not be in keeping with making those decisions on what is in the best interest of the United States. I think the issue is what we need to do to make sure the enemies cannot establish. I think that the whole thing is dependent upon conditions do not agree to continue the reduction of violence and so on than we are in a different place, but right now things are looking good as of today so we want to see. It is conditionsbased and we want to take it stepbystep and week by week. Its never again becomes a place where a safe haven would attack at any point in time it is completely conditionsbased we stop. Entering or committing now we will have to complete withdrawal of the forces in the agreement makes it difficult for us to have the credibility that we need to ensure that we cannot, to ensure that they cannot establish thank you mr. Secretary and general milley for your testimony today. Is it safe to say china is a central focus of the strategy . It is the principal focus. Is it safe to say that its a central component of meeting the central focus . Yes they are in the appropriate timeframe. Is the construction of the barrier wall on the southern border, is that contain . , and security as part of it. That the construction of the border contained. Eight southwest border, theres a lot of things that we do all the time. Its a result of the reprogramming of the funds to build additional borders to meet the central focus of your words. The items that were sourced we determined to be in the build either access or later need. I appreciate your efforts to try to support the president s reprogramming request but youve been very disciplined and focused on making hard decisions, the discipline and focus i share as a matter of fact if you have long spoken about the need to cut back on the missions in places we are addressing very wellestablished threats in the middle east for example reducing the troop levels. It seems inconsistent with me that they would then support the shifting of resources from the wellestablished Defense Programs that are directly tied to the beating central threat to the detriment of the mbs and i would urge you to be consistent at the next question is do you anticipate additional need for money or resources to meet the coronavirus in the dod . We have not had that discussion yet what we would like to do is consult with the chairman. There is an urgency that we share and members of the committee share weve been ringing alarm bells for quite sometime and i think we are out of time. General milley, would you care to comment . The secretary is right. Weve got to assess the situation and it is spreading and we cannot give a definitive answer. We are taking the appropriate measures right now so we owe you some answers. The quicker the better. We are having the discussions right now about funding and resources and we need that information to make sure we are working together with the pentagon to meet what i believe is a very urgent threat so we appreciate the urgency behind that. Do you believe Climate Change is real . Yes i do. Is a threat to th National Security and military . I believe it is a challenge for the military installations conferences with the impact of Climate Change. The wellestablished threat of the refugees increased pentax instabilities increased tourism that could result in post additional challenges. It is a chain of events. It does pose a threat to the National Security. It could create the situation that could involve the military but that is a series of if and when. I think Climate Change is real and was resourced depletion and things like that you will see increases and disease. Does it impact National Security, yes it does. Do you believe we are making the effort right now to address those threats . We are making efforts, yes. Is there more we could be doing . Right now in terms of the international peace, no. In terms of the infrastructure which was one of the questions, weve got to look at all of the infrastructure to make sure that it can withstand things like rising seas and so on and so forth and that is a level. If in fact we use the term if we are going to fight tonight would you be happy to reserve, we need to make sure the guard and the reserves isnt due to a bill payer for the active component because we have to look back at the example of 1953 and on. As we do bill payers we have to maintain the capability of the total force. One of my colleagues mentioned being an all volunteer force i would suggest to you we are in all recruited force because if you have ever been a recruiter you have permission to accomplish and where we have our longterm Talent Management is to maintain the best of the best weather is on active duty or they do transition to the guard reserve with the talent we need to keep the best of the best for as long as possible. I want to switch subjects. You mentioned early on in the hearing about strategy driven budget is what i wrote down having used your terms does the strategy include serious efforts to control internal costs, reduce waste and streamline a forward thinking department of defense Business Model because we can talk about things and capabilities, but if our business process is just throwing money down a black hole, i need your thoughts on what youre doing in that part of the strategy. We have to be good stewards day in and day out. It begins with the audited as at was mentioned earlier this month discussed. It shows a lot about yourself if you look in the mirror and find out your inventory whatever the case maybe we need to continue along that process until we get a clean opinion and that will take time but theres a lot of process reform we can do and i think that in time we will get there using a a guide to help understand the process. Weve got to go back every now and then and i should say not every now and annually make it a business of going back to look at what youve been doing at the defense white review into getting rid of the old, but with return on investment. Thats hard for people to do. And that is the only way we can check the path to keep moving forward. 740 million is a lot of money and we appreciate that so i am committed to making good use of every penny, nickel and dollar. This is a nationwide problem and dod is leading over the first 24 hours i chartered the Dod Task Force now given the updates ive been working on teethree we have been closely engaged with the epa abiding by whatever state law whatever a state we have to get the Fire Fighting and number to understand the impact from the people outside the gate and number three we need to keep moving forward to understand how to mitigate Going Forward and that is the commitment we have made and you will get my reports earn one soon where we stand on this. I yelled back. Continuing on the issue of pphos thank you for setting up that task force that was a great thing and on that bipartisan basis we pass the first six provisions into law dealing with pphos including the marker to offer the pphos by that marker and the epa has not done his job to set a standard what safe and what is not safe so you cannot live up to standard that does not exist. You are required to live up to state Environmental Standards state of michigan is in the process of setting up our own pphos the standard we commit to living up to the michigan statewide standard quick. I think thats re one regulation by law. I think the people of michigan would love a form all answer. And i want to take that conversation away from the wall. People can have a big healthy debate but i do have to know there is an issue with preceden precedent. In those two ever voluntarily move money against the oversight defense committee. For every secretary of defense to come. I am concerned we will become the piggy bank for any pet project today the wall tomorrow could be someones decision to fund the Health Care Project exclusively of the dod budget. I appreciate you want to work with congress and respect us but you dont if at the end of the day the money they have appropriated is for something else. The second issue that you leave us no choice to constrain your reprogramming authority and this kills me i used to be at the pentagon i relied on that authority but you put us in a situation to uphold our constitutional oath that we have to assert our authority. Where you take that money from of the three. 9 billion you have asked to take away, one away, one. 5 billion is from the guard and reserve. For all of that equipment request can you say directly and why to pay for the movement of money. It is excess access based on the dod budget in 20 i had a chance to speak with the service secretaries. I take my recommendation but as a former guardsman i get it. I understand. But we had sources we have to fill and we try to be very objective. I am really concerned you have not done work on coronavirus when we were dealing with ebola we didnt want to get involved and then we had to because the crisis was looming. I would know that president s request for the Supplemental Fund is two. 5 billion against the 10 billion he has requested not requested but moved to the wall. Tell me what you will do to make sure you are on this we understand your needs now because there are some concerning reports this could turn into a pandemic. We do owe a Quick Response as this evolves rapidly we have been very engaged for several weeks with the inter agencies so i appreciate the offer we will get back to you soon as far as anticipating and leaning forward. I was confused on your answer of Climate Change i heard that yes you believe it is a National Security threat but secretary esper you had more caveats your own staff put out a report in 2014 that Climate Change has an impact on National Security like more super storms needs more reservist is that a threat to National Security quick. What you said is different i agree Climate Change creates impact but the specific question do i divide as a National Security threat and i dont with my traditional thinking of National Security threat. I agree with that. I think the significant National Security is china and russia north korea and iran and terrorist we cant do everything for everyone there is infrastructure and education and Climate Change in healthcare there are all kinds of threats that are under the rubric of National Security but i think Climate Change has impacts resulting in challenges and those sorts of things in different parts of the world absolutely. So that second third order is a challenge as a result but as i defined them are not interNational Security for being here today. So following up on the coronavirus we have a soldier in south korea that has self quarantined mr. Secretary are you giving guidance to limit the movement of soldiers and families understanding this is very nomadic and people can carry it for weeks are are you giving guidance to limit the back and forth a. Im giving guidance with the commanders to make sure we continue our mission they have been acting very aggressively abrams has taken action with regard to limit certain things and control the gates. I understand protecting the force they are but i mean the transmission back home. It is not just local but our own folks in terms of how we manage this to make sure it doesnt escape us i got another update this morning on this issue. Just to follow up on the opening comments, its important we begin talking about our competition with china this way we could be in a postcold war strategy but i dont think beijing or moscow ever got that message they are explicit particularly the chinese with their desire to supplant the United States to take advantage of our free markets and universities in international institutions. This is a concerted effort. Would you agree the strength of the United States and our adversary is the economy much more than military strength. What concerns me people like to make conspirator comparisons between china and russia but the might of potential compared to russia that could feed their military and innovation. We have the largest market which i think is great but im also concerned we are funding beijings research and development. Where do you share my concern those dollars are going to institutions we dont know their faculty, researchers or Chinese Students part of the Talents Program and where that research is going quicks do you share that concern on the one hand we have such a large budget abroad the other hand we could be funding our adversary. I am concerned about espionage and theft of cybersystems and ip theft. To support legislation to limit institutions receiving dod dollars if they have the chinese Talents Program quick. I am concerned about students are professors to have access to our research. Where do you share my concern on the markets that are biggest pension programs like the first savings plan are providing billions of dollars to Chinese Companies in the Defense Industry so directly we are funding the Chinese Defense buildup. I have spoke on this in the past using our Capital Markets to fund their activities and want to understand better but americans that provide the capital they need. And those limiting into the us firms that are funding the Defense Program fund their activities and want to understand better but americans that provide the capital they need. And those limiting into the us firms that are funding the Defense Program understand you want the affirmative answer but i have to get my facts straight. Thank you mr. Secretary. Totally understandable. On afghanistan, the concern is that the signal that we are prepared to draw down and withdraw from afghanistan could cause a fracturing of the government by extension of the fraction of the army which is the canary in the coal mine going back to 2001. Where do you agree that caliban has the capability to enforce the agreement to keep al qaeda and ices sat bake wax where we have struggled is there a military capability to keep al qaeda and isis the. That has to be taken for the record. You have to get back to him on that. Thank you so much for sticking around and being here all morning thank you for your testimony and for your service. This is a hearing to focus on the budget i heard a couple of things that were alarming to me and i would like to drill down a little bit on them in particular about the wall and reprogramming of the funds appropriated by congress i represent texas home to fort bliss the second Largest Military installation a critical key asset to National Defense. The juxtaposition of what we are dealing with is the profound disconnect that while we have investments that are badly needed Strategic Investments like the railyard or rail improvements that are critical we have infrastructure deemed unsafe money is approved for all wall that is preventing moms and babies and dads and children from seeking asylum protection and somehow that is key to our National Security. I would like to ask mr. Secretary, how do you ensure a Community Like mine and fort bliss that the soldiers are not asked to rely on unsafe infrastructure as the money is diverted for a wall keeping out those moms and babies and fathers and children quick. We wouldve put any servicemember in a situation affecting life or health of safety if you aware of that i can call the secretary of the army but Life Health Safety issues fall to the top of the list has not been reported to be a would like to follow up if that is the case. I will. Out is a border wall improve strategic capabilities. The purpose of the wall is to secure the border from Illicit Activity whether criminal trespassing or counter narcotics in the case of the sources it comes from the counter narcotics that is the purpose so the Border Control can respond more effectively and quickly to make sure we prevent the prevent those from coming across the border. It is pulled through the counter narcotics asking to support dhs on the routes for the counter narcotics to come across. One of the things i heard from you is the funding pulled on projects ahead or in excess. When one of my colleagues asked in more detail about that funding you said congress put it there. So are you telling us we over programmed in those cases quick. Bad is not unusual going back decades but if we ask for three f35s you give five we consider those two additional access to need. I dont mean to interrupt i apologize. So as we look to plus up programs that we believe are critical to National Defense or to help reinforce the mission that we all share, it would be helpful for us to know in advance where we see the excess of need. We know some of those areas but i feel this component enables the president what i consider to usurp Congressional Authority and usurp the will of the peopl people. Any help that we could get as we try to determine those funds and looking for the offset to better utilize the money so the wall that could be had with a committee of the department of Homeland Security and not the committee for armed services. My time is up i have questions but i will follow up separately. Thank you gentleman for staying long enough to get to the last person and the newest member. Leading up to this hearing i want to understand the driven approach i thought dod would be using to develop a budget request and in doing that i reference to documents by your Department One is the annual Performance Plan the other is the performance report. Have you reviewed those documents to use your submission to the committee quick. I am aware i have not reviewed the recently i have to defer to my staff. The first strategic objective that we should restore military readiness to build a more lethal force. Is that an objective we can agree with. It is in our strategy. But i will dig down because with the performance report the goal is that how did you accomplish that where are we if that is justified with the request that you are making to achieve those goals. The number one priority goal one. One. One to improve the departments ability to understand readiness i assume it is referring to that and the goal is still to figure out how to report readiness i even found a 1988 gao study on military readiness that says for more than a decade various audits and oversight organizations have questioned the dod report on readiness. Not great at math but over 30 years trying to figure how to report readiness. And then digging in further with your budget outline you specifically say you will give 125 billion to readiness than three. Four and air force one. Seven additional funds to readiness and in your comments today do support the navys decision to find readiness but we dont even know what readiness is. I do one of the changes i made is a better understanding of readiness we are making great progress with the joint staff. But still your number one objective is to figure out what readiness is. We now assess that based on the immediate reaction. At least since now i have been on the job nine months we will continue to revolve the process based on more plans what we need and when we need us we are prepared to put that at the highest readiness level. I appreciate that feedback you have a better idea it just wasnt reflected in this document portrayed to be part of the process to develop the budget i do want to associate myself with the comments about a concern about the direction we are going with shipbuilding and constructing i will not reiterate the fleet Response Plan nos study is coming. We agree on this issue. [laughter] and the importance to point out the scale of that investment looking at that importance of 90 percent of the Ground Forces of one. Five or 2 billion we could buy all the ships that we need use but we dont prioritize that because he buy the equipment and we cant get it there if you could expand but you seem to indicate look at the way that if we dont have the ships to get them there in that time planned it would take longer as that something you are reevaluating. When we reevaluate risk it is based on the ability of us to do the military task as the acceptable level of cost in the course of time. And that would be stretched out. I understand you are running short of time and i do want to give everyone a chance before we get you out. The chairman is always correct. [laughter] aq chairman. Thank you so much for sticking around to hear from me you have endurance to make it through this so thank you so really quick the National Defense strategy outlined we must prioritize emerging technologies as china invest very heavily in those areas do you feel secretary we are investing adequate resources to keep pace with china quick. In the two areas you mentioned i do those at nine other areas that are Critical Technologies for the future we are putting as much as we can to accelerate development. I have an air force Research Laboratory in my district and we have established a Science Innovation center to leverage partnerships with dod and academia can you talk about the partnerships in this area quick. I think it gets to the issue we discussed earlier to make sure we tap all potential resources whether the traditional big Defense Companies but academia small innovators entrepreneurs the whole broad range to deliver the very best for the war fighters. Counter ua sim concerned what our adversaries are up to and i went to ask because the same research lab is doing a lot of great work countering you aas threats so can you speak briefly how the services are postured to address this threat quick. It is challenging and constantly evolving quicker than we can respond we have all services moving out of a number of different programs. We consolidated that last year now they have a more focused effort with fewer systems to accelerate them. But we need to get to a point it is much more softwarebased to stay ahead of the enemy that we can use back here in the states and overseas and then on the battlefield. The threat is increasing significantly in the Unmanned Aerial Systems this doesnt only apply to nationstates but terrorist organizations. We are putting a fair amount of money and getting them deployed we are using them right now like in afghanistan and iraq. What collaboration is there with private industry right now because the lab that is in the district is right next door to the faa test site and really that 50mile radius from upstate new york seems to be an ideal location right nextdoor to the counter ua s work what collaboration is taking place with dod and private industry quick. I know there is but i cant give you specific collaboration or examples but i do know there is with industry and all the systems are built by commercial industry that we start Funding Research development thats all done. I think we need to take it back and get you a response i will give that to the air force as well. Also if you ever want to see the work they are doing at the lab the air force Research Laboratory there is a lot that could be done on the technology taking place. I yelled back. Im sorry we are over time there is a quick question that hasnt been covered yet do i think it would be helpful if we could do that very quickly. Very briefly there was 109 servicemembers identified as having after the bombing in iraq could you give us an update on how many have been diagnosed and what is the status of their conditions. Item number one it is a First Priority to take care servicemembers to make sure their medical needs are met and they recover expeditiously the number is 112 right now based on what happened for go this was a new challenge the first day we have seen them subject to Ballistic Missile attack so we are learning i met with the joint surgeon to understand how these symptoms manifest over time that might change how we categorize but 70 percent have been returned to duty some have returned home but 70 percent have returned to duty they have all been mild. Thank you very much. The only closing comments i have two things raised a couple times it was raised that we need to have between three to 5 percent above inflation in the Defense Budget to meet the National Defense strategy highly unlikely as you know we will hit that number. It might be appropriate to rethink aspects to see what makes sense to keep with that overall theme that they match the end and on the nuclear piece this is something we will fight in the budget because the two two. 5 million is a big part of what has mr. Courtney so upset. What has mr. Courtney so upset. Difficult battle betwee we have enough ships overall and with that i will yield for any closing comments he might have. I think it is also incumbent upon the secretary and chairman and to telto tell us what we ned and if we dont provide it then we have some of the responsibility for the consequences that come with that and finally i think it is up to us to dig deeper into exactly where those funds come from. Are they intended for a particular purpose that give aid a weapon refurbishment for example thats been delayed, and i know weve got some of that. So it is more into the details, but i appreciate the witnesses being here. We had a Missile Defense and poured a bunch of money into things and canceled the program after spending 2 billion determining that it didnt work. Thats the kind of thing we want to try to avoid. Thank you for your patience getting to as many members as we did and i appreciate your service into that and for that,e adjourned. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2020] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] we are live in san jose where Bernie Sanders is holding an of the superead tuesday primary. Awkward to a pole by uc berkeley, senator sanders is in the leader to win the california primary that we will have those results live on tuesday. Life Campaign Coverage now on cspan. While we are waiting for Bernie Sanders to come out and videoto the voters, some from last night in virginia, another super tuesday state, where the senator spoke to supporters after finishing second in the South Carolina primary. Very proud that in this campaign so far, we have won the popular vote in iowa. [applause] sen. Sanders we have won the New Hampshire primary. [applause] the sanders we have won nevada caucus. [applause] but, you cannot win them all. A lot of states out there and tonight, we did not win in South Carolina. And that will not be the only defeat. There are a lot of states, nobody wins them all. I want to congratulate joe biden on his victory tonight. [applause] now, we enterand super tuesday and virginia. [applause] sen. Sanders i believe very strongly that the people of this country on super tuesday and after are going to support our campaign because we are more that a campaign, we are a movement. Thank you, thank you, thank you, South Carolina. [applause] my buddy jim clyburn, you brought me back. [applause] a man of enormous integrity. Who knocked,you counted out, left behind, this is your campaign. [applause] ago, the pundits declare this candidacy dead. Now thanks to all of you, the heart of the democratic party, we just worn and we won big because of you. [applause] and we are very much alive. [chanting] you launched all, bill clinton, barack obama to the presidency. Now you are launching our campaign on the path to defeating donald trump. [applause] mr. Biden this campaign has taken off. So join us, go to joe biden. Com, volunteer, contribute a desk contribute if you can come out there is a place for you in this campaign. [applause] as we celebrate tonight in columbia, let me talk to democrats across america, especially those who will be voting on super tuesday. This is the moment to choose the path forward for our party. This is a moment and it has arrived. Maybe sooner than anyone guessed it would. But it is here. At the decisions democrats make across america in the next few thiswill determine what party stands for, what we believe, at what will get done. Nominate may, i believe we can beat donald trump. [applause] mr. Biden keep nancy pelosi as speaker at a take back the United States senate. [applause] mr. Biden so join us. America, joinss us. If democrats want to nominate someone who will build on obama on the nra, take keep the poorem, give the poor a fighting chance, keep the promises we make, then join us. If the democrats want a nominee who was a democrat. [applause] democrat. A lifelong [applause] democrat. A proud at obamabiden democrat. So join us. That was former Vice President joe biden last night in columbia, South Carolina. We are live in san jose, california, waiting for candidate Bernie Sanders to started this event with voters ahead of the super tuesday primary in that state. Our cspan campaign 2020 coverage continues now. Please welcome bernie 2020 regional field director. [applause] san jose. [applause]
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.