fight we can t back down on. this is all we can do. we will not give in. they hope it doesn t turn out so bad. they are doing it because it s the only hope of a dollar worth of cuts out of this administration. this is in law. obama will give you no cuts. bret: the republicans could say transfer authority and take $85 billion and fight another day. that is it for the panel. stay tuned for nasa s reaction to last week s meteorite crash. [ lisa ] my name s lisa, and chantix helped me quit.
election and belief on the part of that they can win and take back the house. i agree this is inevidentable. we will reach sequestration for sure. why is it that the government doesn t say fine, transfer authority. you can do priority. take out conferences. you don t have to go to the conference to do xyz. don t have the child care problem. have transfer authority for agencies and don t make it an issue. pass a bill tomorrow. that is why this is the ridiculously hyped armageddon since the mayan calendar. this look worse tan the mayan disaster. this as you say can be solved in a day or an hour by allowing transfer of funds.
you can t do that. we cut it regardless a good or bad idea. bret: year over year the budget overall is increasing the pentagon is unable to avoid affecting personnel negatively because they have to cut across the board to those individual buckets. absolutely. they have no choice. it seems crazy because it is crazy. if you were doing rational, you know, management of anything you would say what is important, people are important, make sure they get paid and take the cut somewhere else. they don t have the ability to do that. so the people will get furloughed. wasn t congress pass a bill and say well, give transfer authority for sequester so they can move the money around? the congress could give every agency transfer authority. it doesn t, because it likes to control where the money is spent. decide how much money get spent. likes to know where it goes. what state does it go to? projects i like or not like. bret: the president could call for it, congress could do
of the sandy supplemental which passed on december 28th, but we were unable to get the language included in the house version. this is not new money. so, first and foremost, i would greatly appreciate this committee weighing in, working with your counterpart in the senate, give us this transfer authority otherwise we re going to be behind the curve again. secondly, i think it s very important to change the laws about best value contracting, versus lowest price technically qualified. by statute, the state department local guard contracts in dangerous places like libya, and everywhere else, except iraq, and afghanistan, must be awarded using a lowest price, technically acceptable selection process. we have requested a change in the legislation that would allow us to use some discretion to try to deal with the varieties and vagueries of
included in the senate version of the sandy supplemental that passed on december 28th. we were unable to get that included in the house version. this is not new money. first and foremost i would appreciate this committee working with the counterpart to give us this transfer authority. otherwise we are going to be behind the curve again. secondly i think it s important to change the laws about best value contracting versus lowest price technically qualified. by statute the state department guard contracts in dangerous places like libya and everywhere except iraq and afghanistan must be awarded using a lowest price technically acceptable selection process. we have requested a change in the legislation that would allow us to use some discretion to try