Testimony on the department of defenses fiscal year 2018 budget request. We welcome secretary mattis, chairman dunford, secretary norquist and thank you for your many years of distinguished service and your leadership of our men and women in uniform before we begin. We all want to acknowledge the service and sacrifice of Sergeant Eric houg, corporal dylan baldridge, these three soldiers from the armys 101st Airborne Division were killed this weekend in afghanistan. The thoughts and prayers of this committee are with their loved ones. The sacrifice of these heroes is a painful reminder that america is still a nation at war. That is true in afghanistan where after 15 years of war we face a stalemate and urgently need a change in strategy and an increase of resources if we are to turn the situation around. We also remain engaged in a Global Campaign to defeat isis and related terrorist groups from libya and yemen to iraq and syria where u. S. Troops are helping to destroy isis and reclaim
The Trump Administrations approach. New mexico and utah officials review current land use application process and delays in permit approval. Without objection, so ordered. Under Committee Rule 4 f, any oral Opening Statement are limited to the chairman, ranking minority member and the vice chair. This will allow us to hear from our witnesses sooner and help members keep to their schedules. I ask unanimous consent that all other statements be made part of the hearing record if submitted by 5 00 p. M. Today. Without objection, so ordered. Today we will examine access to oil on federal land. Or subcommittee is holding a hearing to discuss offshore federal oil and Gas Development and we ask the members reserve all offshore questions for the next hearing. States are owned by all americans and the bureau of Land Management is obligated to responsively manage and develop these resources. On shore federal oil and gas accounts for 20 of americas production and is integral to our Nations Energy,
Abrams with the Commonwealth Fund, and we thank them for their since medicaid was the medicareside program in 1965, it has grown into one of the most farreaching programs in our country, in terms of the number of people it serves as low as their health and life circumstances, and the cost of the program. It is run by the 50 states and territories within federal guidelines and financed by both the state and federal government. So while medicaid policy has National Implications it of course has major implications for states and their citizens as well. As we know, major changes to the Medicare Program have been at the forefront of recent Health Care Policy discussions and are included within legislative proposals in both the house and senate. Today we will talk about what those proposals are, how they would work, and what they would our in practice based on best evidence and projections. I just want to make a special note because while it is really easy for medicaid policy to get very won
We have been trying to get you here for years. We have. We have been trying to get him here for the longest time. It is so good to have you here. We have a little over an hour. We will have a conversation, we will take questions. When i say i have read all your books, i literally have. This is not all of them but a quarter, 1 5 maybe. Destructive generation was the first one i read, this is with peter callier. And second thoughts about the 60s, the one where you came out from the left, left to left. And this book is, he did not ask me to do this, i promise you. Radical son is great. This is like the Whittaker Chambers witness of this generation. I believe National Review or one of the publications, Weekly Standard said Something Like that. Weekly standard. He has done of late a number of different books, the black book of the american left. I have volume one, volume two, and there have been at least three, maybe four. David maybe six. Host there is so much here. I cant keep up with the
Gentlemen of the delegation, it is great to have you here. You are always welcome here, your ideas are welcome here. Is i loved, it the article in the paper, you wrote so eloquently in the daily telegraph. I think it was only about 10 days ago, in there about the values that are nations share being not tradable. I thought it was a very concise way to sum up so much of what we stand for and also what we stand against. Faced greathave odds, often at a terrible cost, and waterloo and 100 places i would say that you fought courageously for freedom after all those years and some things are in during in this world enduring in this world and it is hard to find a greater bond in freedom and peace. I would say the relationship between the u. S. And u. K. Were joined by over 200 years and to those values, those shared values, including liberty and respect for Human Dignity and regard for basic political freedoms. I will also point out that the relationship is not an historic artifact, it is high