Have been with an average age of 25th. Averages average. That means quite a few of the fleet are substantially older. The shocking statistic, more than half of our our forces are not sufficiently ready today for our highend play. Interfere with you. You did your defenses and the like. More than half of our forces are not sufficiently. I think we also realize that demand we do that and alltime high all around the certainly its dangerous complex and constantly changing the that i can ever remember in the 34 years that i have been. Have to join my colleagues and say that a budgetary trajectory that resulted in sequestration is not going to allow us to sustain the space. Let me now do my plays became. I believe sequestration is going to place american lives at greater risk at home and abroad. Sequestration remains the law of the land in the United States air force simultaneously be able to defeat in adversary and one for cant deny a 2nd adversary the objective a seat as well is the from th
For over 30 years long before there was any such thing as the internet as we know it today and i submit the reason we have these things is we have been unwritten unregulated by the federal Government Information Services that have allowed the innovators to blossom. So i agree. Chairman wheeler this committee has requested a number of documents that have been denied under the claim of deliberative process privilege. For the deliberative process privilege to apply an agency must show a communication was, a communication was, a direct part of the deliberative process and that it makes expression on legal or policy matters, and matters, and on proceedings like the open internet proceedings ex parte filings are required to disclose committee cases between the fcc and executive branch for its staff, if those discussions are, i quote, over substantial significance and clearly intended to affect the ultimate decision. Now, i am trying to figure out how these two different concepts apply here.
Sitting around, and we were writing regulations for i dont remember if it was the Fair Housing Act or the housing part of the americans with disabilities act, but anyway we were there and we were deciding you know what the rule should be for employers when it came to ramps and door knobs and sunken living rooms and all kinds of stuff like that. And it was appalling. You know, none of us knows at that table knew anything about the business of how to build an apartment complex. Why were we sitting around, you know making up all these rules . It was just very scary. Hes another part did i hear you say earlier in your testimony that you didnt have to have a familiarity with something in order to do the job . Well, no, i didnt say that. I said that you didnt think you had to be to put it bluntly, i dont think that you have to be a black person in order to be able to sell pepsis to a black person. And this notion that only members of a particular group can effectively market to members of th
Privilege of operating. Admiral greenert cannot be here due to a death in his family but im joined by the very able vice chief, admiral michelle howard. Uniquely, the navy and marine corps provide presence around the globe around the clock. The nations first line of defense. Presence means we respond faster. We remain on station longer. We carry everything we need with us. And we do whatever missions are assigned by our nations leaders without needing anyone elses permission. We have always known americas success depends on exceptional navy and marine corps. Article one of the constitution, which you quoted mr. Chairman authorizes congress to raise an army when needed. But directs it to provide and maintain a navy. From the first six frigates to our growing fleet of today from tripoli to afghanistan sailors and the marines have proven the founders wisdom. American leaders across the spectrum have understood the vital significance of the sea power. We deploy in peace just as much as in
Employees. We have a body of law and several years at least of experience. But title 7 has been worked out perfectly but its very controversial. One of the things that developed quite late sometimes 50 years after it passes. For example, right here, weve been told that title 7 can be used in terms of Sexual Orientation and gender identity. Nobody would have thought that in 1964. And maybe thats the right way to interpret it, or maybe its the wrong way. But its wrong to suggest that the language is not going to be a problem, because its not a problem now. Thats not the way statutes work. I understand that but i think its more important in your considerations to address what is the real problem now that we are trying to ameliorate. I think thats the wrong approach. We have a problem we have to deal with it right now. Lets go with whatever good language we have. We want good language. That wont be abused in the future. We want it to cover only the things we want it to cover. Do we have th