, deputy secretary of defense. i'd like to acknowledge my three children who have accompanied me here today. kayla, will and jack were seated behind me. i also want to take a moment to recognize and honor my parents, joann and michael shanahan. i am the oldest of three boys. my father michael shanahan instilled in my brothers and i, from as early as i can remember, service before self. my father was an army veteran who served in vietnam. he taught his boys to love his country and value its freedoms. my father served in law enforcement for over 25 years. he taught us to treat people fairly, respect lawn order and the importance of protecting the community. my father cofounded a food bank in 1982 that's ongoing. to date it has distributed over 200 million pounds of food to the needy. he showed us that with initiative and outreach, good ideas can scale to make a big difference. >> at age 52, my father was afflicted with parkinson's. he battled the disease for 17 years before passing. i never once heard him complain. m

the house is working through the nearly 800 alien dollar defense-related spending -- $800 billion defense spending. watch live coverage on c-span2 or watch any on c-span.org or anytime on the c-span radio at. bowden talksark about his book way, 1968, one of the longest in bloodiest battles of the vietnam war. >> the saigon military command was so out of touch with the reality of what was happening in the streets, they got a lot of young americans killed. deniedneral westmoreland that the city had been taken. he continued to deny it for newly the whole time the battles fought. as a consequence, would never conceive the sphere number of enemy combatants in the city. units werers of being ordered to attack positions everything held by overwhelmingly superior enemy forces in entrenched positions. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern on c-span's "uma." -- q and a. >> as part of our freshmen profile interview series, we talked to representative mike johnson about his political career and agenda. this is 10 minutes.

investing more in our defenses come expanding missile defenses, accelerating nuclear modernization, pumping more american oil and gas. none of those things look very good babysitting in the kremlin. none of those things are supported hillary clinton or wee much democrats in the campaign either. we've struc instruct their maint in syria wrong footing bladder putin showing the can't protect that client. where started to take a tougher line on iran. were continuing and expanding the european reassurance initiative which i hasten to add is regrettable that we had to start something called the reassurance initiative after eight years of the obama administration. so i have to dispute the premise of the question that he trump administration six months in his been anything other than tougher on russia when it comes to the real world. >> i see question writer in front. >> hi, i'm hank, worked in ish and then it the senators office and i set up the process and laid out the options which led to euro missiles and thus the inf. and later on in 1998 i got to visit a former ss-20 base. by the way, there w

fallon was at the pentagon meeting with defense

this is a joint event between the defense industrial initiatives group and the missile defense prompt which i run. and before we get started at bigger events like this we just ask folks to kind of familiarize themselves with the surroundings just in case you have to exit or something like that. take the stairs out here or take some exits to the back. and should there be any reason to do that you can either just look to me or to andrew for that sort of thing. and to kick things off, i'm going to hand things over to andrew hunter to introduce our first speaker. >> good morning, every one. thank you for joining us. and i am andrew hunter, director of the defense industrial initiatives group here at csi s. and as tom mentioned this mornings event is a clab bags. and for those of you wondering what the definition of collaboration is, we're just trying to give you a demonstration this morning. it's my pleasure to sbrulgs senator tom cotton who is going to join us this morning and give us some great, looking forward speech. senator cotton is a senator from arkansas. he serves on a number of

the future of missile defense. he talked about ways to strengthen missile-defense while also discussing the inf treaty preservation act which he sponsored with the goal of bringing russia into compliance with conditions set by the intermediate-range nuclear forces treaty of 1987. held by the center for national interest, this is two hours. >> why don't we get started? time short for good afternoon, everyone. my name is trying to peer welcome to our friends here with us in the flesh as well as those are join us on facebook life and as well as c-span3. today we present you a real treat, not one but two part discussion on u.s. missile defense policy. part one will be the gentleman sitting next to me, right, center to tom khan from arkansas. part two after his keynote address as well as q&a session will be what hope is a lively debate on missile defense with joseph cirincione and rebeccah heinrichs. i'm going to keep my remarks prebrief doesn't want to spend as much time with senator cotton as possible. it goes without

in general, and in russian defense planning in particular. as i mentioned before, these exercises don't take place in a vacuum. the context matters. what i am going to do to follow-up is simply to say a few words about what we have seen in recent exercise history, say something about the issues this may raise for the present and is in return to this year and try to suggest what it is we should pay particular attention to, especially in light of the broader trends we see in russian defense planning and the broader european security environment. first a bit of exercise history. as marco said, the soviet union and then russia has been doing this exercise for long time. they are regularly planned and announced at four-year intervals. the two most recent ones took place in 2009 and 2013. the 2013 exercise has some aspects which are very much worth noting as we look ahead to this september. it was, first of all, there is a question of what its purpose was. this september.it was charactere russian official statements as essentially an antiterrorist

the defense of okinawa would be the same as the defense of the mainlands, air and ballistic missile defense, cruise missiles defense using the full weight of u.s. and japanese forces. more and more is planned, there's already a battalion-sized unit more or less going in. japanese forces are already done. the posture is getting stronger over time, and unless there's some miraculous parting of the skies and the situation gets better, our alliance is going to get stronger to defend the territory, the interests, and the lives of our japanese allies. >> it's a very, very big thing to attack the united states of america. that's a huge, huge thing. and you know, the public discussion we get nervous, but we need to remember what a huge thing that is and the consequences that we would think about. this is not some ambiguous gray zone we're talking about. it's two of our most important treaty allies and like-minded democracies. other questions? we have one more in the front. matthe matthew? >> i'd like -- steve winters, independent researcher. this is a followup on the question that was just addresse

this is a joint event between the defense initiative group and the missile defense project that i run. before we get started, at big events like this, we ask yourselves to familiarize yourselves with the surroundings in case you have to exit. there are stairs around here or take the exits to the back. should there be any reason to do that, look to me or to injure for that sort of thing. to kick things off, i will hand things over to andrew hunter to introduce our first speaker. andrew: good morning, everyone and thank you for joining us. i'm andrew hunter, director of the defense industrial initiatives group. as tom mentioned, this event is an collaboration between our two programs. for those who of wondered about the definition of collaboration, is, we are giving you a demonstration this morning. it's my pleasure to introduce senator tom cotton to give us some great remarks and a preview. i am looking forward to the speech. senator cotton is the senator from arkansas. he serves on a number of important committees in the senate including near and dear to my heart, the armed services c

this is not a vote whether we are for or against missile defense. i'm strong for missile defense. i want to make sure that it works. mr. cooper: in the national defense authorization act of 2015. the gentleman's amendment is not supported by missile defense agency and not supported by the pentagon. what it is is a vendor's dream. what it is is a defense contractor's dream because it will sell stuff to us, the erican taxpayer and citizens promiseing national defense but not proving it. we need to apply it before we buy it and test it before we invest in it. we need to make sure it works dough.we fork over the , this is allowed to be in this is an amazing breach of what i think has been american law for 150 years. back during the civil war, there was a law passed called the lincoln law and so many americans were outraged that the bullets sold to the union soldiers did not work and the cannonballs didn't work and the boots didn't last in the rain, they passed one of the toughest laws passed by this congress to penalize defense contractors who sold us stuff that did not work. we need

missile defense policy. amendment 252 by dirk cooper concerning modification to the reporting requiremen requiremene classification of nuclear waste. amendment 269 by mr. brooks to include the acceleration of the global strike program to permit by 2022. amendment 275 are won by mr. frank to require to plan for and carry out a nuclear weapon design competition. amendment 286 or two by mr. kaufman regarding limitation on the availability of funds related to the dhs program. amendment 29, 294 are won by ms. stephani to require a full spectrum of contributing factors to be a included in the decision for the next continental u.s. interceptor site. amendment 320 are won by mr. hunter regarding the restriction on funding for an alternative solid rocket force until after an independent study. >> is there discussion about number two? if not, the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from alabama. all of those in favor? all of those opposed. the amendments are adopted. if there are no further amendment

advance our national defense and secure our borders. take care of our veteran, provide critical infrastructure funding, increase resources to combat the opioid epidemic, maintain our presence as a leader in global diplomacy. all the while maintaining fiscal discipline. i'm disappointed that we won't consider all 12 of these bills before the august recess. but this security package is an important step forward. it will ensure that we as the congress uphold our most sacred responsibility to provide for our nation's common defense. under the previous administration, our department of defense faced needless uncertainty. i'm proud that we are now turning the tide, providing our troops and their commanders with the necessary resources to respond to threats from countries like russia, china and iran, as well as crush the violent extremists who wish to do us harm. as promised to the american people, we're rebuilding and modernizing our military as an international powerhouse by better equipping our troops, strengthening counterterrorism efforts

of defense. i rise in support of the opposition with chairman wittman. thank you. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from virginia. mr. wittman: i reserve. i reserve my time. the chair: the gentleman has the only remaining time. mr. wittman: thank you, mr. chairman. in closing i want to say that going to admiral richardson's words, admiral richardson clearly states that the mission of icebreak something a coast guard mission -- icebreaking is a coast guard mission. the disagreement is using resources that are within the defense budget in order to do that. if you're going to put the responsibility for building icebreakers and maintaining and operating them with the coast guard, yet you're going to put the money in the department of defense budget, where there's no control, no oversight, that is a catastrophe waiting to happen. it if this is to happen, it should happen within the department of homeland security budget, or there needs to be a debate about whether where ultimately the coast guard

what should be our priorities on homeland missile defense, not just missile defense for our allies and the asia-pacific or the middle east? and where should the priorities be? and do you see the threat to the homeland increasing? there has been a lot of testimony over the last year from the top military and intelligence officials that it is literally at our doorstep that north korea is on the verge of an intercontinental ballistic nuclear missile that can range the continental united states. give us a sense of your thoughts, background and priorities. >> absolutely. continental unit states. give us the sense of your thoughts, background, and priorities on missile defense. >> absolutely. my last time in the department of dense was over ten years ago running the gmd program, grand-based mid course defense to defeat a launch of icbm out of north korea. we'd placed all the intercepters, i think 40 of them up in alaska. the koreans -- north koreans are learning quick already. ten missile tests this year, you know -- they're going to continue to evolve their capability. we need to evolve our

other topics included improving the defense acquisition process and prioritizing defense innovations. >> good morning. the committee meets this morning. we consider the nomination of patrick shanahan to be deputy secretary of defense of the united states. mr. shanahan, we thank you for joining us today and for your willingness to serve our nation at an important time. we welcome your family and friends, and as is our tradition, we invite you to introduce them at the beginning of your testimony. it's important that this committee and other committees that congress pebbled receive testimony, briefings and other communications of information. so it is standard for this committee to ask certain questions on order to exercise its legislative and oversight responsibilities. have you adhere to applicable laws and regulations governing complex of interest? >> i have. >> will you ensure that your staff complies with the deadlines established request to communications, including questions for the record in hearings? >> i will. >> will you cooperate in providing witnesses and briefings in respon

defense cooperation. speak into that. >> aso and also potential in the indian ocean took also curious about if you could comment on uk india defense cooperation at the potential for that going forward take in a time and air domains. thank you. >> thank you. i think will take to my questions have been a come back around for a second round. right in the back. thank you. >> i'm tyler with at&t. with the increase in cyber attack and with military presence across the world, can you for the discussed uk strategy how to increase communication networks? >> i want to make sure i understand. >> strategy and -- >> the bridge strategy on cyber? >> yes. >> is there more specific on offensive capabilities? >> more defensive. >> thank you. there is one more. the gentleman behind and a promise i'll get to the next round. >> i'm david smith. secretary tillerson says in the meeting today between president trump and putin that president trump did press a couple of times, several times on the issue of russia's interference p

the defense of oak now is the same as the defense of the mainland. air and ballistic missile defense, cruise missile defense using the full weight of u.s. and japanese forces. more and more is planned. there is a battalion going and the posture is getting stronger over time and unless there is some miracous event the territory is stronger. it is a very big thing attack the united states of america. that is a huge thing. it is a public discussion and woe get nervous. we need to remember what that is. this isn't some ambiguous gray zone. we are talking about two of our most important allies and like-minded democracies. other questions. we have one more in the front. >> i will take it. steve winters, independent researcher. i am just follow-up on the question just addressed. i did geographic to a talk by one expert on north korea who suggested that even if the regime were destroyed and the arti artillary would be to go a passive guerilla and partisan war and this would not resolve itself in months but rather going on for years like libya perhaps. is any

and that is the need for a stronger, modern defense. last modern defense. last year saw the person of the nobel prize economist thomas shelley, a great american who helped our current notions of deterrence. were you with us today, he would remind us deterrence is about much more than the atom bomb or hydrogen bomb. it is not ensuring that our adversaries always know that the cost of an attack will be far greater than any potential reward. in the cold war, that meant massing armies along the borders of the iron curtain whilst building up vast nuclear arsenals. gray-zoneage of conflict with proxy, nonconventional threats, sometimes anonymous, adding to the conventional and nuclear dangers that are threatening to undermine the rules-based international order of which are security depends, our deterrence must necessarily evolve. agility will be critical. it will demand constant and strategic planning to prepare for a broader range of threats. it will require perpetual persistence to continually countering cyber intrusion. malicioushe misinformation of our adver

it is absolutely defensive. it is meant to reassure, they are defensive deployments. and that is a rather different approach than what we see with russia. but as moscow conducts that exercise with its troops, there should be no doubt nato has demonstrated an enhanced forward presence and the task force has demonstrated its willingness to back up its support. and to have the president reconfirm the united states commitment to article five yesterday was the icing on top. heather: i want to turn a little bit closer to shore. you mentioned the cooperation bilaterally and trilaterally with the maritime patrol aircraft. there is a growing concern about russian submarine warfare activity in the atlantic. there are tabletop exercises in washington on the greenland-iceland-u.k. gap. we have not done that in a long time. i read a report recently, saying we need to beef up nato's command structure. there is much more u.k. leadership role in submarine warfare. we have actually had some back and forth with russian defense ministry officials about the aircraft carriers, theirs and

last year, a provision in the defense authorization act asked the department of defense to develop a separate plan to transfer responsibility for those background investigations of d.o.d. personnel to the pentagon. instead of the national background investigations bureau. the bureau would continue to perform other background investigations for all the other government agencies except the pentagon. if that plan were implemented, resources and capabilities that are currently under the direction of the bureau would have to be duplicated by the department of defense. h.r. 3210 would require a report to congress on the cost of those duplicative resources and efforts. for congress to make an informed choice on who should be responsible for conducting background investigations, we got to know the cost. finally, the oversight committee also adopted an amendment offered by my friend and colleague from illinois, representative kris mortgagey that would require a -- mr. krishnamoorthi: that would require an investigation for personnel in the executive office of the president. this would help co

. >> my question is to the minister of defense. the minister update the senate with the relationship to the united states. >> i also take this opportunity to very briefly acknowledge the deep and long-standing interest of our colleague who has today announced his retierm from this place. and your contributions will be -- during the recent talks in sydney last week, we have of course affirmed our alliance with the united states is at the core of our defense and security arrangements. australia, is of course responsible for our own security, our own prosperity. there is no higher task for government. but we are stronger when we work with our partners and our allies to address these challenges. the strength of our alliance with the united states is based on shared values including our strong commitment to the security, stability, and prosperity of the region. our regional strategic environment is more uncertain than it has been in 75 years. these commitments and shared values were underscored during the sydney-auszman meeting. our rec

on improving ever sever defenses. defending our own defense, improving that critical national infrastructure, and also building up the offensive cyber capabilities that we have already confirmed that we are now employing with the coalition against dash, which i have recently confirmed the would be supporting the services of nato if those capabilities were acquired. -- work required. quired.ere re on the meeting between president trump and president putin, i have drawn attention on my speech to russia to undoubted russian interference in european the netherlands referendum and the french election, the attempted coup in montenegro, i am not going to inment sadly on interference the united states election. >> i think we will have a second round here. i will move back around. >> thank you very much for speaking to us. i'm retired from the state department. my question is cyber. has the british government made what would be the line that would trigger an article five nato response? i am not expecting you to say ,learly yes

we're spending nearly $700 billion in this bill on defense. that's a lot of money and the chairman mentioned a lot of the very necessary programs that that's going forward. however, that breaks the budget caps. in order to break the budget cap the house and the senate have to vote to break the budget caps. it's july. we haven't done that. i will emphasize that in the senate it requires 60 vote tots break the budget caps. so as much as i see the need in defense given the complex threat environment out there, it is very possible that $72 billion of what is in this bill is going to disappear between now and the end of this year, unless we address the broader issue of sequestration and budget caps. i'll also emphasize that addressing that issue by gutting funding for the nondefense discretionary budget and plusing up defense is not going to work. for a couple of reasons. number one a lot of the national security needs that we have come out of some of those other items. the proposal to cut the state department by 31% in a time when we face the comp

policy at estonia's ministry of defense. as some of you may know we served previously at the embassy in washington and it's great to see him back in town. so i'm just going to say a few words before -- before we let our experts and leave the representatives loose, and i want to say a couple of things and why they're important in the atlantic council. this is a big summer of exercises in europe. two major nato exercises just wrapped up in northern europe, and baltops and nato completed a big anti-submarine warfare exercises off the coast of iceland and nato will conduct a number of exercises, as well and this is all in response to a russia that continues to be assertive, in and around europe and elsewhere and is clearly bent on altering the european security order in its favor including with military power. >> so the recurring interest is with the transatlantic security committee and it can tell us about russia's intentions and previous capabilities and they've given us clues to russia's ability to, for example, rapidly mobil

it helps them get around that cap. 600 million dollars in defense spending that would billion in defense spending that would bust through they will have to rewrite those caps later on. >> this bill came out of the armed services committee after debate, unanimously approved. what are the key provisions in the bill that we will see debate on? some bipartisan agreement on the general -- on the bill in general. the house rules committee met yesterday and teed up 88 amendments to go on the floor today. we expect they will meet again today, this afternoon, to make and order another tranche of amendments. something we will probably see haste on, the house rules approved a couple of amendments that would strip provisions in the bill that bar the administration from moving detainees from guantanamo bay to states.ed that is less of an issue now because you have an administration that wants to at least keep guantanamo for the time being. there is an amendment from tom mcclintock that would allow for base closures, a process known as bracks. it is not popular. there is another amendment from colorad

my question is to the minister for defense personnel. will the minister update the house on the progress being made for australia to host the invictus games in 2018? how has the government provided support for our defense members to participate in this international event? >> the minister for defense personnel. >> thanks, mr. speaker. and can i thank the member for his question. and i know he is a strong advocate of serving defense personnel and our veterans. mr. speaker, today, i had the great honor of announcing our team for the invictus games this year. they will travel to toronto. i did that with the co-captains. peter.d it is incredibly moving that today is the seventh anniversary of the tragic black hawk accident where we lost three commandos in that accident. and during the press conference we paused -- and i know i speak , for all members of the house -- in remembering those brave commandos who lost their lives seven years ago. >> here, here. >> but it is also truly inspirational, mr. speaker, because three of the commandos who w

worse lowering the non-defense cap to help pay for defense. as a matter of fact, that's exactly what happened with the trump budget proposal for 2018 when the administration proposed $54 billion increase in defense and $54 billion cut in non-defense. non-defense discretionary funding provides resources for hundreds of programs that affect americans every day, programs that range from producing innovative research to advance the quality of our lives to making sure americans drink clean water, breathe clean air, travel safely and maintain our status as the world's economic leader. the 2018 cap for non-defense spending matches the lowest levels in history as a percentage of the economy, but the chairman's mark brings that level even lower cutting $5 billion more. over ten years cuts under this budget get even worse, non-defense discretionary funding will decline from $511 billion in 2018 to $424 billion in 2027. that's an 18% cut in actual dollar amounts. for 2017 that's an ndd cut of more than $200 billion from cdl's baseline while defense sees

the poles never ceased its defense. the jerusalem avenue passage required constant protection, repair, and reinforcement. but the will of its defenders did not waver even in the face of death. and to the last days of the uprising, the fragile crossing never, ever failed. it was never, ever forgotten. it was kept open by the polish people. the memories of those perished in the warsaw uprising cry out across the decades and few were clear of those who built and defended the jurors alum avenue crossing. those here is remind us that the west was saved with the bloods of patriots. that each generation must rise up and play their part in its defense. [applause] every last inch of defendingon is worth with your life. wn fight begins with our minds, wills, and souls. the ties of civilization requires no less defense than that there part of land where: once -- where poland once rested. depend on memory. heart and weour are in the fight. broken, will never be andvalues will prevail civilization will triumph. chanting donald trump

the house will continue work on the 2018 defense programs and policy bill at 9:00 and eastern. it authorizes pentagon spending. more debate expected today. one of the amendments they debated on thursday dealt with climate change and national security. here is a look. thank you mr. speaker. i would also like to think the chairman of the committee for his hard work and his defense of those that where it the uniform ,nd take on that tough task especially in these tough and troubling times of financial austerity where he stood up and let everyone know that the military has been cut significantly and the impact on our national security. in that vein, my goal with this amendment is to prioritize those resources on those that pose an immediate and direct threat to our national security. would strike the requirement for the secretary of defense to submit a report on the vulnerability to military installations. change over the next 20 years. i'm not here to debate climate change, whether it's real or whether it's not, how it's created, how we fix it, all that stuff, that's for another d

instead, it has gutted our defense. we're in a world today where the north koreans, the iranians, the russians, the chinese, isis, al qaeda are all continuing to make strides against us, mr. speaker. one of the things that i'm often asked as a new member of this body is what has surprised me in congress?me i came to this body, mr. speaker, as somebody who has spent a lot of time focused on national security and defense i? i came issues. as someone who spent a large part of her career really invested in and studying and learning these issues. i thought, mr. speaker, i was relatively well informed about these issues. i have been stunned, mr. speaker, as a member of the house armed services committee, briefing after briefing after briefing at the extent to which we have fallen so far behind. and i think it's critically important for my colleagues, mr. speaker, and for the american people to understand the extent o which our adversaries are, today, fielding and developing capabilities and systems against which we cannot, ma

investing more in our defenses, expanding missile defenses. accelerating nuclear modernization. pumping more american oil and gas. none of those things look very good if you're sitting in the kremlin. none of those things were supported by hillary clinton or democrats in the campaign, either. we've struck their main client in syria, wrong-footing vladimir putin. showing they can't protect that client. we're starting to take a tougher line on iran. continuing and expanding the european reassurance initiative. which i hasten to add is regrettable that we had to start something called the reassurance initiative. after ate years of the obama administration. so i have to dispute the premise of the question that the trump administration six months in has been anything other than tougher. on russia. when it comes to the real world. >> i see a question over here in front. hi, i'm hank gaffney, i worked in isa and then at the center for naval analyses, i set up the process and laid out the options which led to euro missiles and thus, the inf. and later on, in '98 i got to visit a former

defense sec. mattis: ladies and 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 histo

paying for the defense of europe? it has been raised by president obama, and president bush for him. germany, 1.2% of the budget on defense. a rich country like that not taking care of their own defense needs. arl on the democratic line from massachusetts. caller: good morning. thank you for c-span. pirchner, mr. i would like your imments -- mr. pirchner, would like your comments. arms dealers are making money selling arms to poland and romania, the baltic countries. the united states is just making target set of these countries. out,confrontation breaks they will get nailed first. we are relatively safe here. those places are going to get nailed first. they are making targets out of them. if there is time, i would like to comment or hear your comment about crimea. i will just say it. putin would have gone into crimea if the united states had not removed -- guest: i think two good questions. the first question was arms by us making money selling arms to be put the countries of central europe and other places in greate

we invest more in our defenses, expanded missile defenses, accelerated nuclear modernization, pumping more american oil and gas. none of those things look very good if you're sitting in the kremlin. none of those things are supported by hillary clinton or democrats in the campaign either. we have struck their main client and syria -- in syria showing they cannot protect their client , starting to take a tougher and on iran, continuing expanding the european reassurance initiative which i hasten to add is regrettable. we had to start something called the reassurance initiative after eight years of the obama administration. i have to dispute the premise of the admin -- of the question that the administration has not been anything but tougher on russia when it comes to the real world. >> there's a question right here in front. hi, i worked in i.s. sa. and i set up the process and let out the options which led to euro missiles and thus the imf. on, in 1998, got to visit a former ss20 days. there were nonemployed and east europe, they were applied across -- they were deployed across the so

but we absolutely cannot afford to allow the quality of our national defense to decline by further defense budget cuts. i urge my colleagues to oppose this amendment. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. thornberry: i yield myself the balance of the time. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. thornberry: mr. chairman, i oppose this amendment. i'm concerned about a growing notion that we can thank service members for their service, but then somehow not provide them everything they need to do their job. that we can continue to allow them to have airplanes that don't fly, ships that can't sail . not having the readiness they need to prepare for the missions we send them on. as the gentleman from ohio said, that hurts people. and unfortunately that's what's happened in recent years. mr. chairman, defense spending this year is still 18% below what it was in 2010. so what's happened is we have cut the defense budget while the threats that we send our military out to keep us safe from have grown. and remember 2010 was before russia invaded crimea, before chin

in national defense. we were told, hey, you don't have timer to for that, we don't have the budget for that -- have time for that, we don't have the budget for that, we can do this. yet some of the most black eye moments have been with contractors. what about on the administrative side? that would make sense. i see my colleague, representative ted lieu, here. he and i have been very frustrated in seeing some of these types of decisions being made with contracting. the office of personnel management. hey, let's take this away from the department of defense and let's move all of these classified personnel records and we'll have a clearinghouse and we can contract that. everything will be good. you don't to devote time and treasure to do this. and yet 25 million exposed records later, of those that held security clearances, mr. lieu and both receiving a letter in the mail saying that we had been exposed because we held top secret clearances in the military. and yet when we made these decisions, we said, this

the poles never ceased its defense. the jerusalem avenue passage required constant protection, repair, and reinforcement. but the will of its defenders did not waver even in the face of death. and to the last days of the uprising, the fragile crossing never, ever failed. it was never, ever forgotten. it was kept open by the polish people. the memories of those perished in the warsaw uprising cry out weres the decades and few clear of those who built and defended the jurors alum avenue crossing. those here is remind us that the west was saved with the bloods of patriots. that each generation must rise up and play their part in its defense. and that every foot of ground and every last inch of civilization is worth defending with your life. our own fight for the west does not begin on the battlefield. it begins with their minds, our wills, and our souls. today, the ties that unite our civilizations are no less vital and demand no less defense than that bear shred of land on which the hope of poland once totally rested. civ

with regard to any of the defense programs? >> sir, i guarantee you continued resolutions cost us more money for less capabilities. >> last week dr. wilson and general goldstein talked about the b-21 program and reiterated the importance that it stay on time and on budget. the program ramps up next year from $1.3 billion to $2 billion requested for 2018. i also understand that a cr or return to bca funding levels could jeopardize funding for this and ultimately request the timely fielding of this critical component of our future national security. general dunford, you just mentioned the fact that we absolutely have to have a long-range strike bomber with regard to our plans of delivering any type of weapons against the upgraded threats of our peer competitors. would you care to comment on the need for the continuation on a timely basis of the development of the b-21. senator, i can't comment on the timing. we've done three nuclear posturing reviews since 2010 that i'm aware of. all of whom validated the need for a triad and emp

i was deputy assistant secretary of defense and dealt with some of those issues from the defense perspective. i say that by way of framing to take two different perspectives to open up what we think about some of the cyber security issues from the situation room to the board room on what companies face everyday. where things are going, i want to say two things that may seem counterintuitive. if the question is where is cyber security going the next 5 - 10 years, part of the question is to look back ten years. was ten years ago last month that the iphone came out as a product. something that is fundamentally changed how we about commerce and other types of things. if you actually look back, the conversation about cyber security has not changed very much over the past five years. we still talk very much about the upcoming pearl harbor cyber attack, we talk anonymously about the threat, but actually what has happened and what needs to change has not changed very much. the fundamental issue is not actually one of technology but it's one of human behavior. it is doing some of the basic work of hy

of the defense sequester. but none of that come none of that is possible without negotiating a bipartisan budget deal. and yet we have heard nothing from the white house, nothing. any budget deal that were passed both the house and senate and be signed by the president will be extremely difficult tohould negotiate. that's why we should have i've and we must start now.in i've been ready and willing all your to begin working. my door and a the majority in m, colleagues door is open to any senator, republican or democrat, but what we really need is for a select group of members to come together with a leaderships blessings to begin negotiating. unless and until this body gets to work on a bipartisan budget deal, we will continue down the path we've been on for years lurching from crisis to crisis, no strategy for how to meet our budget responsibilities or fund our national security needs. my friends and colleagues and fellow americans, we must summon the political courage to do the hard work the american people e

our defense spending has never been a driver of our deficit. it's actually in the long-term house control it by keeping peace and stability throughout the world and helping to keep our economy growing and healthy and avoid the degradation of a general war. what really drives our deficit is long-term health and retirement programs as well ass weak academic growth for the last 10 years, so we can attack from the growth side by trying to get our economy back.

there's many defense and techie policy issues. representative mike rogers in the house has been a proponent of this. representative cooper from tennessee, those two cosponsored this part of the ndaa. so it seems to have bipartisan support within the house armed services committee. that is where it has been considered so far. floor, wemes to the will have to wait and see how both lineup. host: let's go to the independent line in florida. david, hello there. caller: this is really coincidental. i just read an article from "popular science" two days ago written by david x, who writes for the defense of technology international. fly:s entitled "semper marines in space." it turns out that a big pusher retired for me lieutenant. he works for the schafer corporation. it's a military tech corporation. thatpears in this article the air force is quite cool on this concept, but it's actually the marine corps pushing this concept. may i have your opinion on this? i have not heard the marine corps officially weigh in on this one way or the oth

. >> joe gould is congressional reporter with defense news. what does the defense authorization bill and what in the version, the 2018 version approved by the council armed services committee? >> the house armed services past its national defense authorization act for 2018 earlier or sorry, late last month and what it is is the bill, the annual defense policy bill. it gets reconciled with a cent version and in this case they authorized about 696 billion dollars in funding and related policy provisions for the pentagon. >> that's $696 billion figure, exceeds the set in the budget control act. how will congress reconcile that? >> that's a huge question. the budget for defense in this case, the number to know is 549 billion. so what it would take to ease the spending caps is a change in the law and a change in the law takes 60 votes in the senate and 60 votes in the senate takes senate democrats so what we know is if senate democrats have leverage in this deal that there likely to press for more on the non-defense side of the budget which is like

forcing a mandatory 13% cut to ll defense accounts. these phony numbers in this bill not only do violence to our defense budget, they starve the strength of america by ransacking our domestic investments. in order to be the strongest possible america, we must measure our strength not only in our military might but in the health, education, and well eing of the american people. and that's what the problem is. we are stealing from the domestic budget with phony numbers to the defense budget which will be because of the sequester cut the defense account by 13% as we starve our domestic investment. besides the direct danger this bill proposes to our military, it is laden with poison pills. it would squander billions of taxpayer dollars on president trump's immoral, ineffective, and expensive border wall. the president said during the campaign , he said, i promised a wall. no you promised a wall that mexico would pay for. he said it would cost $4 billion to $6 billion. the fact is it could cost as much as $30 billion or $40 billion. and he

there is no one who is more passionate in his defense of our soldiers and our defense than john mccain. and he is just an outstanding man and a very, very good friend. so i admire him very much, treasure his friendship, and wish him the best. godspeed to senator mccain and his family. now, it seems like because of senator mccain's recent illness that it will be at least another week until the republican majority forces a vote on the republican trumpcare bill. i'd suggest to my good friend, the republican leader, that he use this time to hold public hearings on the bill. my republican friends proposed to pass legislation that would reorganize one-sixth of our economy, touched lives of every american without a single hearing. is that amazing? not one hearing, even though we've been on the bill for seven months now. no opportunity to hear from experts in a public setting, let alone consider amendments. so i'd say to my friend, senator mcconnell, let's use this extra week or extra weeks to do what republicans should have done a long time ago, hold public hearings, allow the stakeholders to

mutual defense. which he notably didn't say when he was at the nato headquarters in brussels in may earlier this year. so there will be a lot to see if he is building bridge there's. but an idea that he may come out and be too warm in his embrace of poland will play negatively here on the bigger stage. i think you can expect people to look for that. for president trump, when he gets here, at least, trying to stay on script here is going to be important of course. the big issue of north korea, the big push by the united states, the united nations last night for increased sanctions on korea. we have heard what president putin has to say about sanctions already. but it will be meeting with president xi jinping when donald trump does that here, he'll have to try and convince the chinese leader of the u.s. position and to try to get their support, or at least not have theirs and russia's vetoed by the u.n. on any vote on increase in sanctions in north korea. so staying on script on that topic alone, if he