Naval operations pt started his tenure after the budget control act of 2011 curtailed pentagon funding, derailing Maintenance Programs and training that continue to impacthe forced to today. Despite constant touch constant challenges he pushed back to restore order the organs and advocated for key eorts like a new Ballistic Missile sub and work to change needy culture and open opportunities for women. We met with admiral greener did at the pentagon lasteek. President obama has said he would veto. If that happens congress would lily fund the pentagon continuing resolutions. Couldanalysts predict crs last through next years president ial election. What an impactt would be on the navy. Greenert we have had a twoyear hiatus from it. We have to understand if there is no change we are at budget control act numbers. We are assuming were going to be under continuing resolution. We looked at our programs and said and said what we have new starts a new projects. We are ok for the first quarter.
The transatlantic space to support ukraine. And i do think that our leadership in this is recognized. We are having as spirited a debate as is going on theres also a transatlantic debate so that question gets asked also in our diplomacy. But europeans come at it from both sides, depending upon where they sit. With regard to ukraine and the things that need to be done, and that has been appreciated, very much by my by most of us, i would have at this point significant difficulty coming to work each day with these decisions lingering and the way that they have and us, again, not taking the steps that that many people within the administration, as i understand it, feel needs to be taken. And yet we continue for some reason not to do those things that weve acted as if we might do. I have a number of other questions that ill send in writing. And i thank each of you for being here. I realize that in all cases, yall are messengers and not the ones that have these decision memos sitting on you
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
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
The federal governments job to determine what your mission may be. And certain if youre a private forprofit, were not here to dictate your organizations mission. But a forprofit institution has no special right to federal funding. And if youre going to receive billions of dollars in federal subsidies, we think its reasonable as we endeavor to reauthorize the Higher Education act that we tie some reasonable Public Policy strings to those dollars. And all we are saying is that we want institutions of Higher Learning, and especially their leadership, to wake up every morning and think not first about profits, not think first about how theyre going to market to find more customers, but think about access and affordability. And what were saying is that different institutions may have Different Missions. A Community College has a different mission from a Training Institute and a fouryear institution has a different mission than a graduate institution. And thats all fine. And thats why weve e