Help up here on the hill and we lose months. We move loose four, five, six months to hire Replacement Program or we dont have time. So shipbuilding gets held up. Projects get held up. People were tired and that loses that trust with the industry. So precluding getting sequestered as helpful and in the continuing resolutions having a similar effect in that we are not doing any new projects and some of these are pretty critical as we move into the years and need to modernize. Senator the first comment i would make is over the last two years where above the level of sequestration and the army was only 33 ready. And so yes flexibility will give us the ability to manage insufficient funds in our department but thats all it does. It allows us to better manage because today we extend our aviation programs so the cost for every apache has gone up to the cost for every ua 60 has gone up. The cost for every ch47 has gone up because we have extend the programs longer and longer so we are paying more money for system so we are inefficient even with the last dollars we have so that exacerbates the readiness problems even more. Flexibility would help but its not going to solve the problem we have which is a problem of insufficient funds sent to sustain the right level. Let me ask briefly there was a decision we were going to pivot to asiapacific. To what extent do the joint chiefs of staff consult on that . We have got Eastern Europe and we have rush and we still have the middle east and we can go on from there. It doesnt seem to have calmed down as some people thought. To what extent was this a pentagon decision that we could even have a reputed repivot to asiapacific and afford it . That was part of our discussion. We had numerous discussions with the white house and the pentagon where we did the defense strategic guidance and 2012 so that was one of the kind of foundations of that strategy. I would say i felt we had a good discussion on what we called the rebalanced asiapacific. I would agree with that. We have thorough discussions that we thought china in 2012 is important and we had to have the capability response potentially to that and also the problem of north korea and other problems in the asiapacific. We made some assumptions about where we would be in the rest of the world. This is not quite played out the way we thought with iraq isis and specifically russia and their increased aggression. The strategy is still good. We just have to recognize that there are some additional threats out there that we didnt expect and we are going to have to deal with those. That increases the risk as we look at sequestration and other budget cuts. Thank you gentlemen. Thank you mr. Chairman. Thank you all for your service. General welsch i wanted to ask you in regards to her Nuclear Mission its a very Critical Mission obviously. What impact this sequestration going to have on your efforts in this area . Sir into specific areas i thank at the top of the list. The first is the infrastructure mentioned before. We are at a point in time where we have got to start modernizing every capitalizing that infrastructure in terms of the told facilities that were built 50 years ago now. We have an Investment Plan design prepared to be put into place. We have it in the president s budget this year. If we go to sequestration all of the Facility Maintenance and New Buildings we have put into that proposal will fall off the table except for single weapon storage area and one of the bases. That is the first. The second one as we do have a requirement as a nation to make decisions on what do we want to recapitalize and modernize in terms of Nuclear Weapons and nuclear commandandcontrol capability over capability over the next 15 to 20 years . That affects the air force and navy. The decision seemed to be made in the near future. Sequestration and the ca cabs will limit the amount of things you can do in that arena and make those decisions more important to make earlier so we dont waste money money during a time when those things have to be done. Admiral how will this affect the plans you have for the ohio class . If i get back to the verb if we are sequestered we lose months as i was saying before hiring engineers and we are on a tight timetable to Start Building the first ohio in 2021 so thats one piece. We have to continue to do that. A seabased strategic replacement is my number one program but in fiscal fiscal year 17 to 20 we 5 billion invested as advance procurement for the first ohio which in 2021 is 9 billion on top of the shipbuilding plan we have now. Very difficult to do. We have to do it so well have to continue to work in that regard. Thank you and i obviously have the concern you all do on our warfighting capabilities. When you look at the difficulties in syria and iraq and that area what are the kinds of things we are not able to do there that you look in you go if we were doing this and this it would help move the ball forward forward . Were you being placed in a tighter spot right now . General odierno if he could give us a start. I were to say the first thing is this fight against isil in iraq and syria is a longterm issue. This is not something thats going to be resolved in weeks or months. Something that will have to be resolved in years and is going to require a combination of efforts with the local indigenous governments. Its going to require for term training indigenous forces and support for a very long period of time. Its going to require continued assessments and adjustments on how we believe we will continue to support that effort. I think over time if that threat continues we will have to reassess. Thats the hard part about it. This is not a shortterm problem problem. Its a longterm problem is going to take a dedicated effort to solve the across many lines of effort whether the diplomatic efforts or a combination of joint capability and our ability to train indigenous forces in the capability we will need to do that. So in effect you are facing a longterm challenge and as you look longterm you may have less tools in the toolbox to deal with that. Thats correct. General dunford. Thank you for the question. We have taken the rest not with our deploying units but in its organizations everything general austin has asked us to do from a marine corps respectively are able to do. As general odierno said should this continue its a question of capacity. Everything we are doing at a sustainable deployment. To give you some idea of how fast our marines are turning right now we are deploying from seven months home for 14 months and in some cases less than a backup for seven months in perpetuity. That sustained level of operation tempo something that concerns me and isil is just a part of that. That also makes it pretty difficult on the homefront doesnt it . Senator there are two issues. One of the Time Available to train for all of the missions in the second is obviously the Time Available to spend time with family. We are particularly concerned with or mitt grade enlisted marines when it comes to that particular challenge. General odierno as we look forward how are you planning to mix with the National Guard and how does that figure into your plans as we look forward . Clearly if you look what we have done in the end you have full sequestration we are taking 150,000 people out of the active army so a large majority for cuts are coming out of the active army. Because of that they will have to rely on the National Guard u. S. Army reserves and we have to remember what we are trying to achieve is our National Guard and reserve deaths to respond to complex problems. As we have to rely in some areas more on them in the beginning such as logistics and areas like that where we dont have enough structure because of these reductions will have to rely more heavily on the National Guard and u. S. Army reserve for things such as that. In terms of the combat capability they are still going to have to provide is the depth. We might have you said that the earlier for less capability in the active component. This all gets to this balance that we are trying to achieve. I worry about the fact that if we reduce the active component to much our ability to respond quickly is going to be affected because the world today spends much quicker than it used to. Instability happens quicker and the necessity of us to respond has to be quicker. I worry that we are going to lose that capability. That is what we expect our active component to do and expect the National Guard or messieurs to be right behind us helping us as we move forward with this. I worry about that as well. Thank you all for your leadership. Thank you mr. Chairman. Chairwoman hannah. Thank you chairman. Appreciate it. I want to thank all of you for your leadership and what you are doing for the country and most importantly this discussion about sequestration and i think its very clear the impact is going to happen our ability to defend the nation is one that calls all of us to act to address this for each of you. I think you are being so clear about what impact will be today. Yesterday we heard the same thing from general mattis and general keane and admiral fallin about the impacts of sequestration i think theres a clear consensus among those who have served in formerly served in the military the devastating impact on our ability to defend the nation and our men and women in uniform. I want to ask each of you when our men and women volunteered for service in the Armed Services they give up a the number of rights that the rest of us enjoy. They volunteer to tell our government we tell them what to wear and what to do, where to live and to some extent they give up some degree what they can say. Most importantly they obviously are willing to sacrifice their lives to defend our nation. In return for these restrictions and expectations congress has guaranteed these brave men and women the ability to communicate with us. I believe this is very important. In fact congress put in place a law code 1034 that prohibits anyone from restricting a member of the armed forces and communicating with a member of congress. Do all of you agree that this was important, yes or no . Yes. Yes. Absolutely. Yes senator. General wasser wants to ask you about comments that have come to my attention that were reported to have been made by Major General james post the Vice Commander of air combat command and he is reported to make these comments when addressing a group of airmen this month. What he is said to have made in comments to the airman was anyone who was passing information to congress about a 10 capabilities is committing treason and is part of those comments he also said if anyone accuses me of saying this i will deny it. Let me ask you this general welsh. Do you find those comments to be acceptable in any way to accuse our men and women in uniform to say you are committing treason if you communicate with congress about the capabilities of the a10 are the capabilities of any other of our Weapons Systems yes or no . No maam, not at all and there is an investigation currently ongoing with the incident. When i read the newspaper article i contacted the general officer involved and his commander. The department of defense by eg is overseeing an investigation and will present the facts of the committee as soon as the investigation is complete. I hope this is a thorough investigation because obviously i think this is very serious to accuse people of treason for communicating with congress. One thing i would like your commitment on that i think is very important do you unconditionally denounce it is bound to be trimmed by the way air combat command in responding to press inquiries about this has not denied the general made those comments but do you denounce those comments and do you support the legal rights of members of the air force to communicate lawfully with congress about the a10 or any other issue and you commit the air force will take no punitive action against airmen who are exercising their lawful right to communicate with congress . Senator i completely commit to the lawfulness of the communication with congress. I supported the airmans right to discuss anything you would like to discuss with them and give you their honest opinion. My job is to wait until the facts are on like recommendations my secretary and we will report the decisions he makes as a result of that when its done. I appreciate that general welsh because it worries me about the climate in tone that is that if members air men and women are told they would be committing treason for communicating with us. I just want to be clear because what im hearing is that there is actually an investigation going on in reverse to find out who has communicated with congress and to me that seems the opposite of what we would be trying to accomplish in looking at what general post said the weather was lawful or not. So i hope there will be no punishment for any kind of pursuit of people trying to communicate with congress. Will you commit to me on that . Senator i know of nothing along those lines at all. Certainly im not part of it in the secretary is not part of it and i would not condone it. Thank you. Senator shaheen happy birthday. Thank you mr. Chairman. We wont talk about which birthday it is. Certainly better than the alternative so i appreciate that. Thank you very much for being here gentlemen and for your service to the country. Apropos senator ayottes questions one of the things i would hope is our men and women in the military would let members of Congress Know about their concerns with respect to sequestration because i do think its helpful for each of us to hear from people serving what they see firsthand about the impacts of some of these policy decisions. So im hopeful we will hear more of those discussions. You know, i have been pleased that chairman mccain has started the Armed ServicesCommittee Hearings this year with a broader view of National Security policy and one of the issues that has been brought up with respect to National Security policy is one of the concerns is the fact that we have not had ongoing budget process that people can count on that we have a debt that in the future is a concern it would be important for us to address that. I certainly put sequestration in that category. Important for us to address this and to do it in a way that provides certainty that deals with the shortfalls that our military spacing and its important for us to do that with respect to all of the agencies of the federal government that deal with National Security. I wonder gentlemen if you would agree that thats important goal that we should be working towards in congress. General or do you know . I think the strength of our country is based on many factors. We certainly understand that. What i would say to that is that the important part of our defense spending an important part the role that place in ensuring our security should also be considered. And i know you know that. Does everyone agree with that . Yes maam. Yes maam. See i guess senator. Thank you. To be a little parochial this morning as i think most of you are aware the portsmouth battleship yard that is shared between New Hampshire and maine and as i think one of our very important Public Shipyards and i know you know this. I wonder if you could talk about the importance and the impact of sequestration on her shipyards and depots in the concern that provides. We talked a lot about the impact on our activeduty military but are our civilian workforce is also affected. Thank you senator. I would say the impact was very much underestimated and thats part of your point. If you facts the loss 75,000 mandates that we had to defer because we had little overtime and we couldnt hire and on top of that we furloughed so how do they feel about the importance of it . We lost you will understand the 1700 submarine bases so thats like taking five submarines and tying them up for a year. Thats the kind of impact so i worry about and as i said it takes five years to recover from that collectively. We talked about the importance of the Nuclear Deterrence. These Public Shipyards underwrite all that. Thats because of portsmouth i can do work on the ssbn. Portsmouth is a major part of a ship Maintenance Enterprise that we must have and i worry about it with sequestration. Thank you very much. Is anybody want to add to the impact on depots in the country . Senator i can add from an aviation perspective when we did furlough folks we lost a lot of engineers. Right now 50 of our f18s are underreporting. Also importantly because it was mentioned in her Opening Statement to talk about trust and retaining highquality people. Predictability is important and i fear some of those folks that were furloughed welcome back because they have other opportunities. I certainly share that and i know you appreciate that with respect to the shipyard. One of the things i have heard is as we are looking at the aging workforce and need to hire new people and a shortage of stem educated people that engineers mathematicians and scientists are all in short supply. If they dont feel their certainty about government work they are going to go to the private sector in that creates a real issue for all of us. Sender if i could add we have reduced 4500 out of our tepco contractor employees but what we found following the furlough issue pointed out is our doctors, our engineers, our Behavior Health specialist all of these people because they are worried about the the uncertainty in their Jobs Available from other places. They are taking those jobs at a higher rate than they have in the past. Thats the impact this house. This capability we develop an experienced of developing we are losing. Its a big concern for us specifically in the stem area you are talking about.