committee hearing is five hours. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] >> the committee will come to order. i ask unanimous consent the chair beatty click recess at any point. without objection, so ordered. also without objection member shall have five legislative days to submit written remarks and additional materials for the record. i want to thank our witnesses for appearing today and for your service to our nation, the threats we face a more formidable than at any point in the last 20 years. but the administration's policy of integrated deterrence is doing little to actually deter them. the president's disastrous withdrawal from afghanistan has left us nearly blind in the world, in the worst terrorist hotspot on the globe. north korea is lobbying icbms

over japan and threatening as with nuclear annihilation on a near weekly basis, and iran continues to find and equip terrorists targeting americans. last week when american died and seven were wounded when the ayatollahs terrorist proxies attack are based in syria. we continued to sit by and watch as his regime aggressively pursues nuclear weapons. under sector call last month stated that ayatollah has 12 days away from at the end of this material for nuclear bomb. we absolutely cannot allow that to happen. additionally, the ayatollah is exporting, cozzi drones and other advanced weapons to russia, , and putin is using thm to kill innocent civilians and further his brutal invasion in ukraine. putin has also threatened our nato allies by deploying tactical nuclear weapons to belarus stepping away from new start, stepping up his arrest that of american forces in eastern europe and see. but most concerning is the

strengthening allies between putin and president xi. putin is literally fueling the chinese communist party strategic nuclear breakout with ross a tan highly enriched uranium. and what the former stratcom commander richardson described as breathtaking, the ccp has doubled the number of nuclear warheads in just two years. the ccp the story to outpace us on the battlefield as well. the ccp is leapfrogged us on hypersonic technology. they're fielding what we are still developing. and the rapid advances in space when the primary reasons we established the space force. we all know the ccp is not building these new and advanced military capabilities for self-defense. we watched the ongoing attempts to intimidate and coerce taiwan and our allies and partners in the region. just this week they threaten the navy with serious consequences after we exercise our right to sail through international

waters in the south china sea. and we have heard from combatant commanders over the past month about how the ccp has used economic coercion to gain foothold on new continents. we also heard from their efforts to expand the military presence in africa and site a new security agreement in south america and the middle east. finally, we all know from the spy balloon incident that xi and ccp are no longer hesitant to make provocative actions against americans in the american homeland. these are just a few of the growing threats confronting our nation. how we respond to them is the biggest test we face as americans. many of us here regardless of party believe we should respond with sustained investment in the many women of our armed forces and the modernization of our conventional and strategic deterrent. these investments are going to be expensive, but neither the president nor congress can't shy away from them.

we no longer have the luxury of time. as we speak our adversaries are rapidly expanding their military capability showing much less restraint in employing these capabilities against america and our allies, and worst of all developing a powerful alliance the likes of which we haven't confronted since a height of the cold war. we need to make the right investments in the right capabilities to ensure our military can effectively deter and if necessary defeat our adversaries. i look forward to working with all of you on this effort. with that ideal to my friend the ranking member mr. smith. >> thank you, mr. chairman. want to thank our witnesses, chairman milley and secretary austin, not just a vineyard today but for their leadership in their career of service to our country. appreciative of your efforts to also want to note that this is chairman milley is last posture hearing before he retires and really want to thank you for service and most specifically chairman milley has shown a willingness to engage with congress that has been quite refreshing for me.

it's always a difficult task. the pentagon has her job, we have our job at those jobs intersect within a constitution, within a democracy and i've never worked for the middle of the pentagon has been more willing to engage with congress certainly to appear before us but also to meet with us can take a phone calls whenever because he recognizes the incredibly important role congress plays and oversight role that we must play with duties i think of that and i thank you very much for your service. as chairman laid out we have an incredibly complicated and dangerous threat environment. there are still question about that but i do believe the national defense strategy lays out a vision for how to confront that. we can't make china go, we can make any of those things the chairman shuster talked about go away. we have to forget how do we deal with them, how do we determine our adversaries and what is her central goal. our central goal is a rules-based international order where soffer nations resolve their differences through international organizations peacefully. that's what we're trying to do.

now we have folks out there in russia and china and elsewhere again as a chairman outlined the want to blow that. they want to challenge that. we have to be in a position to deter that. that starts with having a robust and strong military. we've had of the largest defense budgets we've ever seen the last two years. the president has just proposed again the largest defense budget we've ever seen. we are making that investment. i will spare you the long speech that many of you have heard from you before about how i am more focus on how we're spending the money, making sure we are spending it efficiently and effectively. it's always the easiest thing to fall back on and say gosh, we have got to have more money. everything i've ever dealt with that's been answer but again i will quote i think it's winston churchill, i could be wrong, the said gentleman, we are out of money. now we have to think. that's what i want to focus on. where are we spending the money and when we are not. what hurts the objective? huge part of that objective we are not going to be able to deter those adversaries that the chairman cicilline on her own.

it's an absolute impossibility. we need partnerships and we need allies. i do want to thank secretary austin in particular for his outstanding work on helping to build and hold together the coalition that is supporting ukraine. 54 nations, i think a lot of people accept that as a foregone conclusion. it was not and it was not easy. it took the leadership of this administration particularly the leadership of secretary austin to pull it together and help ukraine. we cannot forget that most people assume that ukraine would be taken over by russia by now. they're incredible will to fight, the courage to stand up has been an inspiration to the world but it with that of impossible without the support of that of the international coalition that we helped build. the same time were also building those coalitions to deal with the threat from china that again the chairman i think that a great job of explaining that threat. but the aukus agreement from uk and australia, the quad where we work with japan, india and

australia. we've recently seen japan step up significantly in terms of the amount of money that is been under defense to be an able partner in that part of the world. .. national security needs have been laid out before us today. a couple other issues. recruitment and retention a big challenge. we are not meeting our goals at the moment which a few things about that. the pandemic had a profound impact which we have not been able to recruit effectively under stepping up and doing that. in conversations with secretary austen, he has experience with this. it's not the first time the us military struggled to meet recruitment goals.

i know the secretary is working on that. hearing about the details of that issue. the last thing is something the chairman and i agree on. innovation is the key to meetings that threat environment. we have to develop new technologies that meet defense needs and a lot of work to do and that area. the pentagon was never built for speed. machine learning at new technologies coming on board, we need to access and use them quickly. look forward to hearing about steps that have been taken to change the way the pentagon does business as we do that more quickly. i want to say i know we can meet it. we have a capable congress and capable administration and capable partners the world over. we can maintain the pete -- the piece to meet our national defense needs.

the testimony from our witnesses, i yield back to the chairman. >> witnesses today are the honorable lloyd austin, secretary of defense, and the chairman of the joint chief of staff, general mark millie, and the secretary of defense, mike mccord who serves as dod's top financial officer. we will start with you. >> chairman rogers, ranking member smith, distinguished members of the committee, glad to be here to testify in support of the president's budget request. >> protesters take their signs down and removed from the room. the chair knows that the proceedings taking place, in order, i would like to request

those in the audience causing this disruption cease their actions immediately. i want to advise the protesters, folks in the audience, if you do this again, we are going to recess and you're going to be removed. you are recognized. >> chairman rogers, ranking member smith covered distinguished members of the committee, to testify in support of the president's budget request in 2024. i am joined by general milley, grateful for his readership. i'm glad to be joined by the comptroller and cfo, mike mccord. a strategy driven budget, with the people's republic of china.

$842 billion, it's a 3. 2% increase over fiscal year 2023 and acted and her tone. 4% higher than fiscal year 22 and acted. this will help us national defense strategy from the national security strategy. three key priorities at the pentagon, defend our nation, take care of our outstanding people, succeed through teamwork. the prc is our challenge and we are driving hard to meet it. budget bills on the previous investment to deter aggression, and the force posture, increasing scale and scope of the exercises with our partners. in this budget, a 40% increase over last year's request with the specific deterrence. it is 9. one billion dollars, if that is the stronger posture, better

defenses for hawaii and guam and deeper cooperation. and largest investments, we are requesting more than 60 one billion dollars to sustain air dominance. that includes funding for fighters and extraordinary be 21 strategic bomber i helped develop last september. and new construction of battleships and boosting capacity in america's shipyards to build ships the strategy demands. we are investing a total of $1.2 billion in the submarine industrial place, buying two virginia class attack submarines and one columbia class ballistic missile submarine. on land we are investing in air and missile defense and defenses to counter unmanned aerial vehicles.

we are also requesting $11 billion to deliver the right mix of long range fires including major investments in hypersonic's. we also continue to modernize our nuclear triad and bolster our strategic deterrence. we put forward the largest space budget in pentagon history. we request 33. $3 billion to improve our capabilities and resilience in space. let me again thank congress for providing the department with multi year procurement authorities and appropriations for critical munitions. in this budget we are requesting more multi year procurement authorities and asking more than $30 billion to further invest in the industrial base, and to buy the maximum number of munitions american industry can produce. this budget moves us away from aging capabilities that aren't relevant to future conflicts. cell focusing on the advances our war fighters need.

our national defense strategy calls out putin's highly aggressive russia as an acute threat. under president biden's leadership the united states has rallied the world to help ukraine fight russia's indefensible invasion. we reinforced nato's defense and deterrence on its eastern flank, for crucial security assistance coordinated through the ukraine contract group. and we support ukraine's defense for as long as it takes. the department remains vigilant against other persistent threats including north korea and iran and we will take all necessary measures to defend our troops and our interests overseas as seen in our recent airstrikes against facilities linked to iran's islamic revolutionary guard and also investing in over the horizon counterterrorism capabilities.

mister chairman, our joint force stands ready to meet any challenge. you can see the forces readiness after russia's unprovoked invasion of ukraine, when we deployed the third infantry division to poland, to shore up nato's eastern flank. we monitor readiness at the unit level and maintain response forces at the highest state of readiness. rest of the force by design is preparing for future contingencies. we maintain readiness with $146 billion in funding for operations, training and maintenance. the budget invests in readiness and resilience in the face of climate change and other 21st-century threats. mr. chairman, we will remain the strongest military in the world and as we mark the fiftieth anniversary of our volunteer force, i am enormously proud of the brave men and women who

choose to wear the cloth of our nation. we owe it to them and their families that they take the best possible care of all of our people. the past two years we made moves easier, we cut devices and make childcare more affordable. this budget funds other key steps to increase quality of life of our teammates, including the largest military and civilian pay raises in decades. also pushing hard to eliminate suicide in our ranks including immediate steps to hire more mental health professionals and to improve access to mental health care. and meanwhile working toward a military that is free of sexual assault which we work with congress to improve the response to sexual assault and related crimes under the code of unit go - military justice. those reforms will be implement it by the end of this year. the department is also investing in specialized workforce to combat sexual

assault, harassment, suicide. the department's third priority is succeeding through teamwork. our unrivaled network of allies and partners magnifies our power and expands our security. our friends have taken major steps forward. the philippines have agreed to double the number of sites we can cooperate together. japan committed to double its defense spending, and the historic partnership will work with our australian and british allies to build game changing defense advantages that will deter aggression and boost our defense industrial capacity. and so this is the budget that will meet this moment and i request your support. the single most effective way this committee can support the department's with an on time, full year appropriation. i look forward to working with all of you so we can defend our

democracy and support the forces of freedom in this hour of challenge. >> thank you, mr. secretary. chairman milmilley, you're recognized. >> thank you for the opportunity to testify. i'm very privileged to defend this country for 43 years in uniform. this may be my last set of hearings. i want to thank you, the congress, for your continued support to our military not just on this budget but all the budgets of the past. i ask that you support the request for on-time budget approval. i am honored to represent the soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, and families of the joint force alongside secretary austin, i want to thank them for their leadership. joint force is the most lethal and capable military in the world because of your support.

the military's purpose is simple. to defend the united states against all enemies, foreign and the mystic and our task is to fight and win in all domains of combat to secure america and prevent more. readiness now and readiness in the future, modernization is the number one priority and there's no other number one. the joint force will accomplish this at the 24 budget request of $842 billion. right now the international system is under stress. for the first time, the united states is facing two major nuclear powers, vital national security interests in competition with the united states. the people's republic of china and russia have the means to threaten interests and our way of life, but war with either is neither inevitable nor imminent. the last 80 years in large part because of the rules at place at the end of world war ii and

capabilities of the military along with our allies and partners, we must remain the most powerful nation as we continue to hold. the people's republic of china remains our number one long-term geostrategic security challenge. china is the regional hegemon for asia. in the next 10 years, succeed the united states military capability by mid century, they publicly stated by 2049. they are moving down the path toward confrontation with its neighbors or the united states but china war is neither inevitable nor imminent. russia is an acute threat the remains dangerous. a year ago, russia undertook an unprovoked war against that against global stability. support ukraine to protect sovereignty and supporting nato, on the eastern flank.

to protect the system that prevented great power war for the last 8 decades. iran threatens to push the middle east in regional instability by supporting terrorism, proxy forces. last week irani and aligned groups killed one american and injured seven in attacks on bases in syria. we acted immediately to defend troops and continue counterterrorist threats in the region and in iran, taken actions also to improve capabilities towards nuclear weapons. from the time of an iranian decision iran could produce in a fissile material for a nuclear weapon in less than two weeks and would take several more months to produce an actual nuclear weapon. the united states remains committed as a matter of policy that iran will not have a nuclear weapon. the united states monetary developed multiple options for national leadership to consider

if or when iran decides to develop a nuclear weapon. north korea's ballistic missile testing and nuclear weapons development. to deter north korean aggression in the last 70 years. terrorists operate for destabilization, supporting continued counterterrorism efforts. the military is ready to address the american people. we stand watch on freedom as frontier with 250,000 troops in europe, asia, africa, the middle east, south america. the united states never fights alone. a key source of our strength is the look large global network of alliances in partnership. this month we conducted 63 operations, joint combined exercises with allies and partners.

operational readiness rates for many years, the highest state of readiness in 30 days exceeding the minimum standard we always had. 10% of our force deploying in 96 hours, the military is ready, the joint force is also at the point we must balance current operations, readiness and modernization and not allow ourselves to create the false trap that we can modernize the forces of the future or focus only on today. we must do both and integrate advanced technologies including long-range fire, hypersonic weapons, quantum computing, artificial intelligence, the time is now. we have very little margin to wait. the common thread critical to all of this is our people. we must continue investing in training or education, to be prepared for the future operating environment. i urge congress to support this

budget, healthcare and childcare initiatives, this budget sustains our readiness and adapt the joint force for requirements. there's nothing more expensive than fighting a war and preparing for war is very expensive but fighting a war is the most expensive. deterring a war would deter that war. must act now with clear eyed urgency to deter any possibility of a great war. we must remain strong and the number one military in the world. no adversary should underestimate the result of our nation, look forward to your questions. >> secretary austin, general milley, explain what it would mean to deter china if congress

fails to pass the defense appropriations bill in a timely manner? >> it would have a significant impact on our ability to conduct new starts to go after technologies we need to be relevant and dominant on a future battlefield and that money, that time is lost and we won't be able to regain it going forward. >> last year we did 24,000 collective training with squad to battalion, 23 ctcs, training centers, we are flying all over the world in defense of our country's interests.

keeping the navigation going. if we don't pass in on-time budget go to continuing resolution the readiness levels will drop. we've done this many times. a lot of them will go away. the squad, platoon and company level for ground forces, flying our program which is 150 hours per pilot, with marines and navy, that would come down by 20%, negative impact on readiness. the bottom line in terms of procurement, the monthly start that business needs to supply the equipment we need, all of that, detrimental by a significant degree. our readiness will drop and future modernization programs will be at risk. >> we are seeing growing

cooperation between militaries of china, russia, and iran as well, closer to integration. are we adequately resourced and prepared for this? let me start with you. >> the nds is structured, facing a it for russia and china but this means an exchange undersecretary mattis, changing from a two or strategy, energy potential strategy which was in existence world war ii through a few years ago, we switched to a one war strategy, we planned to resource, train, equip, and force structure our force to fight one major contingency against one great power and hold on the other field. feel. >> how long is that policy been in place?

>> the shift occurred the 2017 nds and i was chief of staff of the army and we participated in it. we conserved. we have to do that but that is the reality. our military capability wise in a lot of cases with different contingencies but if you are talking a serious conflict, realistically, putting china and russia together is a difficult thing. >> that is what committee needs to take note of, the first 15 years that i was here we had a strategy that allowed us to fight two wars simultaneously and defend the homeland. we had to drop that to one theater which is scary enough and i worry if we have a disruption in our authorization it could further erode that capability. tell us a little bit about the intentions of iran and syria

with recent attacks we had, what's the security situation like? >> we had issues with iran for many years. iran in my view, iran's strategic objective is to drive the united states out of iraq and syria for their own national security interests, to establish what is often referred to as a she a present which goes from iran through a rack through syria into has bola, israel, they want to be the dominant power in the region. that's the assessment from the intelligence community and i concur with that. that's the strategic objective. as you may recall, several years ago, under donald trump, we pooled troops off the border between syria and turkey because turkey was going to invade, the first month of my time as chairman and we pulled back, donald trump approved a security zone essentially on

the northeast portion of syria where we put less then a thousand troops. that security belt was put there for specific purpose at the time and that purpose was to continue the enduring defeat of isis, the caliphate was destroyed, isis itself broke down in 2 smaller factors so they were still there and a series of refugee camps and prison camps up there with the stf, syrian democratic front so they guard them. we work with them to do that. if they walk away from those camps, isis will resurrect quickly. it is a primary reason they are still there and i applaud members of this committee that initiated discussions with that. one of the things we want is we want the american people, putting our lives on the line. then we shouldn't be there. i applaud that effort.

>> to determine the initial line on the appropriations bill, i would add that each week we don't raise the debt ceiling places the budget in jeopardy. we could argue about whether we should add 10, $20 billion to the defense budget, but more important is being able to pass it, being able to put it in place and to not introduce the economic insecurity that alone getting to the point where that would be devastating to national security, talk a little bit about your goals and objectives on recruitment to meet that challenge understanding that we have the best military force in the world and no one should forget that. what are your goals as you meet

those challenges? >> obviously as outlined, the goals going forward, the service that fell short by the largest margin was the army. all the services recognized challenges we are currently facing, headwinds by a couple years of covid, inability to get into high school, inability to engage centers of influence. and that's two years worth of head winds, we are working to counter if you improve our efforts here, the services doing the right thing in terms of investing in marketing, investing in the right kinds of recruiters, making sure our recruiting stations are in the

right places in terms of where the applicants are going where they are in the media and establishing connectivity that's really important. this is not the first time the military has been placed with challenges with recruitment. i was assigned to recruiting command because we had challenges in the past as a young captain. i learned a lot about recruiting. we overcame the challenges we were faced with by doing the right things. i am confident that our secretaries, our chiefs, are doing the right things, putting the right leaders in place to make sure we turn things around. each service will have different objectives based on what the requirements are but we see the trends moving in the right direction. it will take, this was a challenge brought on by a

couple years of covid and other things. the lowest unemployment rate we have seen in a very long time. and so it will take a while to come out of the bathtub and get to where we need to be but i'm confident we will get there. >> looking at the threat from china and our partners in the region, building other partnerships in australia, the philippines and elsewhere, how does that affect our ability to deter china? what role do you see those partners playing in being strong enough to deter china from aggression towards taiwan or other neighbors in the region? >> not only in asia but one of our key advantages is our network of allies and partners around the world. in asia we have bilateral defense, in asia bilateral defense communities with japan,

thailand, philippines, australia, that's a network of alliances that is really strong and powerful, so that's a powerful deterrent to china. when you put in the combat power, allies and partners in the region from britain and the uk, they ran exercises in the asia-pacific and other countries close to us, with the ratified partner. they bring tremendous wealth capability on land, sea, and air. >> i yield back, mister chairman. >> the chair recognizes mister wilson for five minutes. >> thank you, for your bipartisan efforts to achieve peace through strength. thank you for your service.

we want you to succeed as i told general milley yesterday. we must face the global war on terrorism which continues, the risks are ever increasing with terrorists coming across the southern border. there is bipartisan understanding, between democracies and rule of law opposed by authoritarians with rule of gun. war criminal putin is perpetuating mass murder in ukraine. the chinese communist party threatening taiwan. the regime in taiwan pledges death to israel, death to america. with that in mind there is such bipartisan support, i am grateful to quote an unlikely newspaper, the washington post lead editorial, on march 6th which confirmed the murderous

invasion of ukraine by war criminal putin demands western support, quote, president biden will be tested by his own success making a similar case, this country could apply its industrial might. it is a gap between the west's rhetoric on equipping ukraine and the pace of actually delivering arms and munitions. european allies security is also to maintain a basic printable of civilized international relations that one state cannot invade and subjugate another. it is clear president biden according to the washington post, administration will be tested and judged by his decision to support the courageous people of ukraine. with that, i want to thank you for what you have done in supporting our allies and partners in the most recent

ukraine and european defense initiative with foreign military sales but we must improve accelerating these processes, rapidly being critical to allow putin to not succeed with his conquest in ukraine. with that, since we have 8000 tanks, can we increase the amount of tanks being provided to ukraine? can we immediately provide peace through strength? >> let me begin by thanking you and all of congress for what you've done to support the effort in ukraine, to provide security assistance. the united states continues to lead the way. we have invested north of 30 billion in its endeavor and it has made a difference,

ukrainians efforts to defend their sovereign territory and we will continue this for as long as it takes. we talk to our counterparts every week, the minister of defense, the chairman talks to his counterpart a couple times a week. we talk about what their needs are, what they are doing on the battlefield and i meet with them in person every month. we feel that we have a real up to date feel for what ukrainians needs are. what is required for them to be successful. they have done -- can -- encountering an adversary, incredibly powerful and they have inspired us all. what you see most recently is that we have infantry fighting

vehicles, strikers, the germans are giving martyrs, leopard tanks. a number of capabilities to enable the ukrainians to go on the offensive. >> i don't mean to interrupt but i want to point out the american people need to know that in terms of percentage of gdp, we are number 9 in terms of providing aid. we are not alone. the final point, i appreciate every effort to monitor the ccp sees as what they are doing, the ultimate target will be the republic of india. we need to be successful in protecting taiwan. >> the gentleman from connecticut for 5 minutes. >> thank you to both witnesses.

in your written testimony, you highlighted the historic gathering in san diego where president biden and the australian prime minister announced the optimal pathway for the security agreement to provide australia with submarine capability. the us has not shared this technology with another nation since 1958 when it did so with the british navy. the plan is to sell three virginia class submarines, can you describe the strategic benefits at the same time we are building up our own undersea fleet? >> our undersea capability is one of the clear advantages we have over any other nation in the world.

helping an ally like australia develop capability that can complement the capability we in the uk bring is critical. it will help us to deter. it will help us to achieve our objective of maintaining an open and free indo pacific, the interoperability that comes with this is powerful. it is generational capability that will increase our overall capability by orders of magnitude. >> it is clear for the us to meet its fleet requirements with its looming undersea gap, a national security priority. the omnibus invested $750 million for workforce developing, supply chain and facility expansion. this year you are requesting

647 million more for the same goals. speak to the need for congress to approve this amount to make it work and to grow our capacity in parallel and discussed the need to reform us export controls to enable technology sharing. >> we clearly have to do more to expand our industrial base. it is important to us anyway but more important because of the fact that we've gone down a path of office, it is a generational capability that i'm happy we have taken on. we will continue to invest in our industrial capability and as we know, australia is investing in our industrial base, and that is the right

thing to do and i complement them for making that tough decision. >> the day after the minister for defense industry in australia pat conroy announced they are moving forward with 6 billion new investments, a new shipyard in adelaide, $3 billion into the us industrial base, an extraordinary statement how serious that country is to make this work. there's another issue that has been in the internet atmosphere somewhat aided by china who is not very pleased about the arrangement claiming this is going to affect the sovereignty of australia's navy, that they are sacrificing sovereignty by going into this arrangement.

can you clarify, this is a sale, title in the ownership of the royal australian navy and they will operate in their own sovereign authority? >> couldn't explain it any better than you just did. it is exactly right. it does not infringe on the sovereignty of australia. they are a great ally and we welcome their decision to invest in this capability. >> this is submarines that have conventional armaments, not nuclear armaments. that's critical to comply with the international nuclear nonproliferation treaty. i yield back. chair recognize mr. turner for five minutes.

>> the leadership you provided, the efforts of the unbelievable logistics that had to be undertaken to support ukraine, this congress has been a lead in pushing the administration for weapon systems provided by your response. my question for general milley, when we gathered to talk about the document for 2023 we had a discussion concerning the sea launched cruise missile. it is a low yield nuclear weapon, a capability that was retired in 2010. the decision was made to redeploy the capability in our budget hearings in 2023, it was important for us credible deterrence, specifically, you said the president deserves multiple options to deal with,

the changes that occurred in russia's posture. is that your position today? >> alternative views. >> the issue of spectrum, radio frequency spectrum. >> dod is not just a user of radiofrequency but part of the federal government, the federal government is an owner of radiofrequency, you don't operate in those areas as a licensee or pursuant to a lease. are part of the use of the federal government reserving to itself or its own use radio frequency spectrum. there have been attempts to diminish or limit access of the department of defense to radiofrequency spectrum, in the 3. one to 3. 45 spectrum. could you please give us information about what that

would mean if we require dod to move or allow others into the spectrum, how would that affect operations? >> i don't want to go into great detail in an nonclassified session but it would be significant to respond to threats, radar etc. . >> you need to turn your microphone a little. >> okay. let me say that again. it would be a significant impact on national security if we were compelled to vacate that portion of the spectrum. there's an ongoing study, don't make any final decisions until the study is complete which is estimated to be in september. then we can make fully informed recommendations and the president can make properly informed decisions. alternately a lot of people want to share it. i understand the principle

behind it and the economy is important, trillions at stake here but also a significant national security interest in that portion. we've got to do it right. if we make a mistake we will pay for it for years not only in dollars but risks. >> it would affect our capabilities and cost trillions of dollars in defense spending to try to adjust, to remove you from your spectrum. >> i would have to get you some numbers from mike mccord, but it would be a lot of money. >> my question is for general milley. turning to missile defense, russia changed its posture with respect to nuclear weapons claiming they might put nuclear weapons in belarus, saber rattling indicating they are suspending new start, they have

undertaken development of poseidon, skyhawk, hypersonic nuclear weapons, china is tripling their nuclear weapons capabilities. is it time we revisit missile defense as we are sitting without capabilities to respond if there is an attack on the united states? >> strategic stability depends on second strike capability which we have and we can guarantee it without question. the united states from a nuclear deterrent posture, we are secure because we have an exceptional nuclear system. we are trying to but the stability of the nuclear system is assured second strike. that's an underpinning of deterrence between us and russia. there are other countries, maybe maybe not with iran, who knows? smaller numbers, integrated or missile defense system is

critical. we have that in the pacific, layered defensive system the comes all the way from japan back with radar and sensors and a number of capabilities that can shoot down incoming threats. making it robust was a smart thing to do. we did out missile defense review. it takes many years but it's worthy of consideration. >> feature recognizes the gentleman from california. >> thank you, mister chairman. general and secretary, thank you for your service, a difficult period of time in this world, you displayed true leadership and thoughtfulness. thank you for that. both of you have talked about readiness in some detail but it doesn't make much sense unless we talk about weapon sustainment readiness. we love new shiny things, we often don't bother to maintain it.

what are the costs when we purchase a platform? do we consider the sustainment cost of the new platform? sustainment requires we have the right people to sustain the aircraft and other platforms we depend upon. all too often sustainment has been left behind. it is an acceptable risk. my question goes to the multiple reports that have shown the department of defense has not met its own mission capable goals for various types of aircraft and ships. to both of you, sustainment informed acquisition. are you directing multiple agencies in the department to include long-term sustainment cost and methodology and all the acquisition programs you want to have? >> this is important and we

have 2 consider sustainment costs in all our investments and platforms. we haven't done that well, we have to do it better going forward. as we've seen with major platforms, if you don't do that outfront, doesn't conform to the degree you want to perform, we have to do this. >> it has to be considered all the time. sustainment costs, weapons systems. >> multiple acquisitions 821. and detail on how to sustain that platform over the next 40 years. in your budget, did you prioritize investments in the

modernization of the facilities upon which our readiness is based? for example, shipyards, the rangers, housing. is that included in your budget? >> we invest in the program and we continue to invest in housing and $5.1 billion invested in increasing operational effectiveness and survivability on our basis. it is an ongoing thing that we are focused on and try to invest in increasing the capability here. >> do you want to opine on the investments necessary to maintain the shipyards and arsenals and so forth?

>> infrastructure for our forces that is mandatory, the best quality housing. with respect to the defense industrial base, investment should be done over the course of time. it will not be beyond one year. our shipyards for example, commercial and naval shipyards have been minimized over the course of 20 number 30, 40 years. that needs to be taken a hard look at to produce naval vessels, 1.5 subs per year. we need to look at all the shipyards but additional shipyards there, we need to look at our bases, we have 560 or so bases around the world. some of those are in better repair than others, some suffered significantly due to hurricanes or floods or fires or various natural disasters. we need to take a look at that and make sure infrastructure -- that is critical to the overall

defense of national security to the united states. >> when you put together this in daa, we spent time and money buying new bright shiny things and neglecting the ongoing sustainment of the various facilities. we do not have this as a priority, the readiness will not be there. the gao reports indicate that that is the case and we have to address it. with that, i yield back. >> the chair recognizes mr. lambert. >> chairman milley, thank you for your 43 years of service to the country. the subcommittee heard testimony about how russia, specifically ross adam, is providing china with highly enriched uranium. china will put this in reactors that will yield plutonium, accelerating the pace of their

nuclear breakout. how concerned are you about russia's role in assisting china's nuclear breakout and what do you recommend be done? >> i'm concerned not only about that, but any cohesion between russia and china in this strategic environment we are in. we are seeing where they are getting closer together. i would not call it a true alliance in the real meaning of that word, but we are seeing them moving closer together. if you add in iran as the third. those countries will be problematic for many years to come especially russia and china because of their capabilities. with respect to nuclear capabilities, transfer of capabilities, i would like to go to closed sessions, it is concerning. >> we will pursue that more later.

as a follow-on, from recent disclosures, china has more nuclear missile launchers than the us and they are manufacturing more warheads than ever for themselves. this is new since some of the posture hearings in the past or reviews have been done. what do you recommend be done now concerning china's nuclear breakout? >> china's nuclear capabilities are not matched with the united states. when you start talking nuclear weapons these are enormous payloads. got to ask how much is enough sort of thing. they have significant nuclear capability today without going into specific numbers, and they have intercontinental ballistic missiles that can reach the united states. that bothersome so we are in a situation as i mentioned in my opening statement.

we are facing two nuclear armed great powers. the principles of the cold war, of deterrence, still obtained but it is more complicated because it's two versus one. anytime you have three variables worse is -- versus one. it is strategic stability, it is essential we maintain that and we do that with china with an assured second strike. that's the best way that exists with the technology that exists. we are probably not going to be able to do anything to stop, slow down, disrupt, interdict or destroy the chinese nuclear development program they have projected out over the next 10 to 20 years. they will do than in accordance with their own plan and there is very little leverage that we could do externally to prevent that from happening. there might be economic levels of power and other things but for the most part, they will probably step out, they have a national goal to be coequal

with the united states and superior militarily by mid century. they are on path to do that and that's disturbing, bothersome. we have to not only keep pace but out face that and that will assure the peace. >> the new start treaty was negotiated with the russians and relatively minor at the time. >> at the end of the day all of those are good but at the end of they military power matters and our military power has to exceed that of china in all the domains. if we do that the with we would have a better chance at deterring any conflicts with china. >> we need to continue that debate on what comes after new start. for both of you, my subcommittee and whole committee want to make sure

that hypersonic's development proceeds as rapidly as possible. if we can identify ways to accelerate their development through pinpoint funding increases beyond the president's budget, expanded testing capabilities or overcoming bottlenecks in general, would you be supportive of that? >> we are investing $11 billion in this budget, in hypersonic's as part of that. we invested in hypersonic's last year. two years ago, 18 months ago, we pulled all ceos together to talk about things to speed up our efforts in hypersonic's. the things we are talking about, greater range of access, we are working on all of that.

if i look at what we are doing recently, 12 successful hypersonic tests in the last year, not every one of them will work but we have 12 successful tests and we continue that work going forward. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from new jersey. >> i think the witnesses for being here today. and echo the comments, 3 years of covid pandemic had a direct disruption on output but also the defense industrial base. we recognize this is caused considerable amount of backlog and disruption. the defense industrial base. we have heard it not only here on the dais today but we have heard it across many committees on not having the workforce.

industrial base is resilient but hasn't been able to answer the call that many of us had expected. this directed the department to increase the use of american industrial base, allies and partners, let me make a statement. not just part-time partners. what has the department taken to date and what actions do you plan, to increase the use of the industrial base capacity and capability to meet our distant? >> we've done a lot and we continue to do more. >> providing a small sigh year contracting authorities.

and and we ask for more authorities. and we would be grateful if you favorably consider. and a strong signal by the amount we are asking for for procurement, $170 billion, and that is a good signal to industry. we've reached out to the industry leadership, talk to them about things we could do to expand capacity in specific areas. we ask for additional authorities to expand certain lines and we continue this work, and we will do more. >> follow-up on the defense production act. would you give us specifics where it has been applied to,

looking for the white house to expand it, not only rare but going to apply it. >> we could follow up with additional details in writing, a good example of what we do for acquiring and purchasing 155 munitions, extra authorities to lean into that, the president gave help with that and continues to help in other areas as well. >> appreciate that. almost three years ago we started heavily in the armament and explosives. any authority that is not available to you now like you would need to expedite this? >> quite frankly no. i think, again, we have asked

you for additional authority to do multi-year contracting that would help us, if you would give additional authority to this budget but congress has been very responsive and helpful. and the president as well. not only working with our industrial base but allies and partners to work with them to talk about how they can expand as well and increase productivity. >> the industrial base as we know from previous wars answers the call, we need to make sure america is asked to bring home some of that incredibly important work that has been offshore from years past. with that, i yield back. >> i recognize the gentleman from virginia for 5 minutes. >> i ask unanimous consent to submit the three charts i am about to present for the record. >> without objection, so ordered.

>> thank you for joining us, thank you for your 43 years of service, incredibly contributive to the overall effort. .. we see the expansionist efforts by the chinese communist party. i would like to point to the first chart. this is where we were in 1999. as you can see we were in pretty good shape in relation to the area of influence the chinese communist party and their the my assets. let's fast-forward to today. we see modernized pla forces. we see the area of influence. significant, significant strategic overmatch by the chinese. incredible. it's hard to believe this is

what they've done through those years. and who not only ketchup but to surpass us. the next chart is what keeps me up at night. this is where the ccp will be in 2025, just down the road, and they had said that if reunification doesn't happen by 2027 they will take military action. we know what is in store. we know where this disparity exists. we see this. this should be a a sobering et for all of us. secretary austin, the biden administration proposes a defense budget that allows the air force to do best 100 -- eight and one fighter aircraft from fy '23-21 x 345 new era prepped over the same time. it disregards congresses direction to the navy to making a minimum of 31 minimum of 31 ships in our amphibious force. it builds nine ships. that's great but it retires 11 ships. i just have a hard time seeing where we're going. i'm not a mathematician i want to know how do we do addition by

subtraction? how does this budget create the capacity and capability to close this gap? how does this send the message to the chinese that this is a return effect for what we know is coming? please tell us what we're going to do with this threat that at our doorstep. please tell the american people what we are going to do to mitigate this threat. >> thank you, sir. first of all, on a budget the way that we construct this budget and the way that we constructed our last budget is that we link our budget directly to our strategy. we not only view of the threat as we see today but we look over the years in where the threat will be several years from now. we are interested in investing in the right capabilities that will support the war fighting concepts that we know that we

will need to employ in order to be successful. it's about the quality of capability of the platforms and not necessarily a number. we talked about fighting as a member of a coalition. we don't go to bow on her own typically, and so we expect that as we engage in a contest with in the adversary in the future, allies and partners will be there, and we continue to invest in our interoperability with our allies and partners as well. it is all about the right mix of capabilities, and if you look at the aircraft that you mentioned, we want that fifth-generation aircraft and capability and that's what we're investing in. we also don't want to have to continue to invest to maintain aircraft and ships that are costly and provide headwinds, and secretary austin --

>> secretary austin with all due respect, quantity has a quality all its own and there's only so many things that we can engage in the bowel space. it's great to have exquisite platforms but we do eventually get overwhelmed in this particular scenario. so to talk about these smaller number of platforms that have this capability is great but capacity matters also. the chinese are looking at everything that we do and everything that we do even with these exquisite platforms they are developing for the capable countermeasures. my concern is is no matter what we're doing within that brown if we don't do both capability and capacity we're going to find ourselves in an incredibly challenging places. i only talk to our war fighters in saying listen we are trying today to learn how to fight in situations where we're going to be significantly tactically and strategically overmatched. that's a pretty sobering place. >> the time of the gentleman has expired. chair now recognizes mr. galago

-- mr. gallego -- rubin is recognized for appreciate the effort, chairman people to do. secretary austin thanks for being you. this of ministers have built an oppressive coalition of allies and partners to support ukraine including the ukraine defense contact group that you lead. looking at the next few months can you share your expectations of the summers nato summit? also what steps have you taken and are you taking to further european security specific on look at the baltic states since we do have a baltic security initiative part of our nda here. >> thank you, sir. as a going to the sum i think what you'll see in that summit is a strong display of unity. no one imagine that this alliance would be as unified as it is today. i jericho or so years ago, you recall that we were discussing the relevance of nato several years ago, and now not only are

our countries united, we see resolved that we have seen in a very, very long time, and we see countries investing more in their defense. and so i think what you will see going into that summit is a call to action for countries to invest even more, to number one, meet the whales pledge of two percentage, 2% of their gdp but to exceed that and invest in relevant capabilities that can strengthen nato's efforts. i think those two things, you'll see as prominent in the summit. >> thank you, secretary perry chairman mellie thank you for your testimony and decades of service. in testimony referred to private military companies russia relies on to undermine other nations sovereignty. to the extent possible in this open setting can you share your

perspective on the relationship between the wagner group and the russian forces at the operational level? are you seeing the wagner is groups present in africa change as a result of the war in ukraine? >> as you know the wagner group is a mercenary private military company. they're conducting combat operations right now in bok moot primary. probably about 6000 6000 al mercenaries and maybe another 20 or 30,000 recruits, many of whom come from prisons. and they are suffering enormous amount of casualties. the trains are inflicting a lot of death and destruction on these guys. in addition to ukraine why the group is many, many other places. places. most notably in west africa. when essentially taken over a country. they pushed out the french out of i think molly and some other places. the water group is an aggressive group led by very ruthless guy. -- widener group, purports to be businessmen but he's got incredible criminal background

behind him. this is a dangerous group. they are quite large come quite powerful and they have at least reached about parts of europe and into africa and maybe some parts of the middle east. we ran into them in the middle these is a couple of years ago in syria, about the battalion sized force that was attacking one of our positions and we destroyed that force. they are there. they are aggressive. most of them are former russian soldiers of one kind of another. a lot of internationals work with them as well. very dangerous group, long reach, very wealthy and rich and they're probably very disruptive internal to russian society. >> thank you, chairman. secretary austin come your testimony highlighted the chumse challenge of both china and russia pose. what step is the administration taking, or step, to counter both chinese and russian influence in africa and south america? >> thanks, sir. the most effective way to counter their efforts in those

areas is presence. what are combat commanders are doing to not only be present in those spaces but also help our partners are allies built partner capacity as well. for an investment of a small number of professionals working with partners, we can achieve tremendous results. but presence speaks volumes, and so we're going to continue to do what's necessary to make sure that our partners in the region in the various regions know that we were the best investment, with the best partner to have, and we're going to be with them for the long term. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. >> thank you, mr. gallego. that you don't recognize mr. scott from georgia. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for being you i know we talked a lot about russia, iran, china, alliance between

the three. i guess that most brazen thing i've ever seen with or in recent times was an attack on the united states has been what china did with fly a spy balloon over since the military installation inside the united states and yet less than 15 days after that occurred ford motor company announced multibillion-dollar alliance with the communist chinese on battery technology. secretary austin, i'm concerned about how we purge china from the dod supply chain. i'm concerned about corporate america partnering with communist china and then slapping a u.s. made sticker on it and us bind it through our dod with u.s. tax dollars specifically with regard to the chinese battery technology. i just want to make sure the dod is aware of ford motor company partnered with communist china on the battery technology to make sure the dod committed to not purchasing communist china's battery technology. can you speak to the issue and

what you at the dod are doing to purge china from the dod supply chain, make sure we're not buying chinese technology with the u.s. sticker on it? >> as you know this is a far bigger issue than just the department of defense. we support a rules-based global market, and that's been what we support for a long time. as you do that certainly you will have supply chains that run through places like china, but what you've seen our leadership do recently is move to, as best we can, begin to onshore some of those capabilities that are represented in the supply chains and limit our liabilities of their and limit exposure. >> secretary austin come if i could would you agree that if you send money to one person and that person since money then to communist china and communist china can use that money against

the united states, i mean, that's a circle where our dollars are being used against us. >> i think the best thing that we can do and are doing is to continue to invest in our database, continue to invest speech i agree 100%. i don't mean to interrupt you. i'm getting short on time and want to move to another question but i would just tell you that i think it's counter productive for the department of defense to purchase technology developed by the plc and chinese corporations. i think there's better technology available, and corporate america does not need to be allowed to sell, stick an american sticker on communist china's technology and sell it to us, , especially at the dod. moving to another question. general milley, there are a lot of activity in our own backyard just south of our border. i been there a couple of times. the drug cartels activity and capabilities of increased drastically over the last few years. we're seeing larger influxes from a lot of countries

including china. we have seen 1000 percent plus increase in the amount of people coming from china. they can get a 14 day visa, travel feeds into mexico and then simply come to the u.s. border and claim asylum, and 72 hours later they are in our country. his southcom, i realize southcom operate south of mexico. southcom and northcom are they giving adequate resources to target the illegal immigration, whether it be from china or the transnational criminal organizations come from south of there in the drug cartels? >> given our global commitments i think they have got adequate resources. however, i would say there's no communication out there who would tell you that they get all the resources that they need. they always need more but i've talked for a with lower richardson and glenn van hurt. there's no question that there's a woman build on our southern

border. it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure it out. you've got thousands people coming across every single day. a lot of drugs come across every single day. you got a be truly fit in a crisis so that is clearly a vulnerability there. of course the precursor chemicals for the fentanyl et cetera come from china and so on. so yes, there's a vulnerability but could be used more assets? sure. this is fundamentally my view. at this point in time until this policy changes if there's ever going to be a policy change, right now this is fundamentally a law enforcement and intelligence operation to work with her host nations in either mexico or some central american nations to stem the flow of the illegal migration and the drug trade. i spent a lot of time in latin america. it's a very complex problem. i've been involved in drug war for years. very complex not easy -- >> but time is expiring. we are being taken advantage of and totally when you get 14 day travel visa to mexico and then simply presents itself to the border patrol and then you're released into this country less and 72 hours, that's a pretty easy way for someone who wants

to hurt americans to get into this country. >> i disagree with that. >> the time of the gentleman has expired. now recognize the gentleman from massachusetts mr. moulton for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. secretary and mr. chairman, both of you set an example of service that should inspire every american across the globe, and it's a honor to have you here this morning. thank you. mr. secretary, and great leader the brandon at which would ensure service members have way to a request mental health assistance an emergency is going to be rolled out active-duty service members by mid april. i'll be keeping close tabs on this rollout. it's taken over 50 months for the department of defense to simply implement this policy since we passed it into law. over 500 service service members have died by suicide during that delay. so i'm grateful it's happening now but i know a lot of the families who lost a loved one want to know why it wasn't done sooner.

mr. secretary, you've outlined the impressive investments we need to make in the coming year but we can't make all of these critical investments if we don't divest of some things that aren't worth the cost to sustain him. what are some of the most important cuts you have made in this budget that you are concerned congress will overrule for parochial political concerns? >> well, , thanks and let me thk you personally for what you did with the brandon act, and i know that you will stay focused on it. i want to assure you that the issue of suicide is enormously important to me, and i know it's important to the chairman as well. so we really appreciate what you've done there. we will continue to press.

i love that airplane but i know you love it, too because you been on the ground speed i think we should get rid of it but what else besides a ten. >> was lcs, some of the earlier variants of lcs. >> would you provide us a a lt of some of these cuts you think are strategically important for us to make? >> we will. i think it's folded into our budget but we will. >> thank you, mr. secretary. what a privilege talk about our investment in progress and hypersonic weapons for a second. our hypersonic missiles stabilizing or destabilizing weapons? >> potentially destabilizing. the issue is the development of an effective defensive mechanism to guard against.

having said that, as you know the russians have used hypersonic technology in ukraine several times and it hasn't guaranteed any type of victory. as a matter of fact the ukrainians are in in a very d place right now and struggling to improve. >> will look, mr. secretary, i agree with you these are potentially destabilizing weapons. a lot of your senior commanders agree. general said in hearing a couple weeks ago that he can't see hypersonics is hard to do continuity of government. it's hard to protect your nuclear posture and that he felt eroded our strategic stability because of course it's very different than in traditional intercontinental ballistic missiles when we see them coming. they know they're going to get the same response and that mutually assured destruction ensures that we don't start that neither side starts and nuclear exchange. i will note that your stratcom commander argued that they were stabilizing as long as we get as

many as the russians and the chinese but, of course, the russians, the chinese are developing nuclear capable hypersonic missiles here what is our deterrent against them? >> first of all i am confident in our nuclear triad, it is a bedrock of our deterrent capability. in terms of hypersonics, we are interested in investing in the quantities that support our war fighting concept xo we need some hypersonic capability but we also need a number of sub sonic highly survivable speedy i'm running out of time. if i may make a point, that were not even trying to match the capabilities the russians and chinese have in nuclear tipped hypersonic missiles because our second assured second stripe as a chairman lee that with our traditional triad is what deters their use. and yet it feels like we're in

an arms race here trying to catch up with russia and china for the worst reasons because we are both rushing to get more of these hypersonics. they are fundamentally destabilizing. that makes the world less safe for all of us. it would be helpful to hear not just a strategy to win this arms race but a strategy to stop it. i'm sorry, i've run out of time. >> the time of the gentleman has expired. the chair recognizes ms. stefanik new for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. would ask both secretary austin and general milley about the unique role the tenth mountain division in ft. drum played great power competition. i had the opportunity to visit with major anderson who's doing a great job after the tremendous leadership by general beagle up at fort drum and we discussed general anderson's alpine initiative to return the tenth mountain division to its roots of cold weather operations and mountaineering. even that both you, mr. secretary, and you general milley were commanding generals at fort drum you are very familiar with the post with unique strengths of tenth

mountain. what role do you see the tenth mountain division and fort drum specifically playing in outcompeting our adversaries in the arctic? >> i think tenth mountain division can play a significant role and does play a significant role in that endeavor. i would also say that are multipurpose division here it can, they have demonstrated they can go a number of places at a very, very effective because their strength is the quality of the people and their leadership and that's been demonstrated over and over again. >> general milley? >> yeah, thanks. a couple of things. first they are trained in arctic operations so that's the key thing. as an of the arctic is opening up. secondly as they are light infantry so they can rapidly deploy. in fact, its most deploy division in the army. the rapid deployment is key at that access strategic deterrent. we have a unit coming back from

the tenth and another unit going over from the tenth over to ukraine area. third thing is there optimized for urban combat as light infantry. they are very effective as the world becomes ever more urbanized the probability is higher rather than lower that decisive fights battles will occur in highly dense urban areas. tenth about has unique capabilities and they bring to the fight rapid deployment, urban combat, mountain warfare, winter warfare. it's a great outfit. it's a great sport, a a great place to work and live and serve our country. >> you took my bike, general billy. i like to point it is most deploy division and u.s. army since 9/11 and we are grateful for so many military families come to know over many years. like to shift gears to related to fort drum but to missile defense. i ran faster and closer nuclear weapons capability and is demonstrated space launch capability which has the direct technical application to an icbm. for over a decade is been u.s.

policy to be ready for a third home and missile-defense site should iran threat mature. the previous northcom commander testified as long ago as 2015 an additional missile-defense site would give us increase inventory and increased bowel space with regards to with that come from the direction of the middle east. while you both have iran increasing development of nuclear weapons or nuclear weapons capabilities as was north korea developing their ballistic missile capabilities i want to get your response to fort drum has been designated as a potential third site. why that would be important to include a third home insight to provide with more confidence to intercept any potential missile. secretary austin? >> certainly defer to the work that we're doing, being completed and look at the results of that work but certainly fort drum, it has tremendous capability and a

great community, so i think if that site is chosen i think would be a good choice. that site has been chosen by the department defense. that was announced a few years ago. we work on that in the nda. it's also current and previous ndaa. fort drum has been designated as the potential third site. general milley speeded potential third site. >> potential third site. what is the process of ensuring we focused to meet the needs out of the past but of the future, 2030 and 2040s because it takes a long time for that of research investment for that to be potentially completed. what is the time what general milley or secretary austin? >> i do think a timeline has been established but i can tell you what we talk about, what you talk about, but the project has been after for quite some time on the books. you look at probably 20 to 40 seidl something like that and then the missiles to go with it. it would take a decade to put

that in. it would take billions i do know exact figures but billions. the question is is it strategically worthwhile? i think yes, because we have a missile threat from north korea but we have a system of sensors in the western pacific all the way to california. we've got missile capabilities that can engage north korea. when you're dealing with china and russia and amateur second shy because of the valley. but i rant if you were to develop the icbm level of missiles, which they have yet, but if they do and to develop the piece parts with space launch vehicles and if they were to then develop a nuclear weapon to put on top of that, that's what it becomes important. now are the on the road to do that? i think that's a choice people want to judge. i personally think developing the system on east coast would be helpful. it would further enhance the protection of the transcript thank you very much. >> the chair the chair e general flynn california

mr. carbajal for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, secretary austin and general milley, for being here before us today. general milley, i want to thank you for your distinguished service, 42 years, to our nation. i know our nation is better for it and hope you enjoy a well-deserved retirement. and i know you will continue to serve in some way to help our country. my district houses multiple military installations including camp st. louis of this bill and vandenberg space force base. vandenberg is unique because of the coastline it sits on faces south making this major brain and test facilitates a safe and ideal setting to test land-based strategic deterrent assets and to safely place satellite payloads into polar earth orbit. despite vandenberg being the only federal west coast range in the united states, investment and launch infrastructure are far behind a crowded east coast

range ecosystem. we are expecting an incoming legislative proposal from the department that advances the range of the future by allowing commercial investment for on-base launch infrastructure, a proposal i am very supportive of. secretary austin, can you speak to the importance of maintaining bicoastal ranges for our nation's national security and unity readiness? >> it's a critical. absolute critical. you heard us talk about it's critical for a number of technologies that we need to invest in, that only the testing of things like hypersonics but also the launching of the space platforms as well. >> the reason i raise it, secretary, is if it's critical then i'm sure i think we're likely behind the critical investments in infrastructure for it to continue to be fulfilled, fulfill its strategic

mission. i raised it in that fashion and as you aptly characterized it, it's critical but i think it needs to be matched by the investments we make in that range. >> i agree. i think you may have heard me say earlier one of the things we did early on we reached out to industry and talked to them about what they needed to be able to speed up the development of certain capabilities, ranges and testing facilities was one of the things that they raised. my ree under-secretary and others with after this and we began to invest in it and lashes budget and also in this year's budget as well. >> thank you. secondly, in your submit a test when you make in some of the capabilities our adversaries in the space domain and that it left unsecured our capabilities in space will become a strategic vulnerabilities. you call on congress to force

visit increase in the budget for space capabilities. can you expand on what you think this increase in investment should look like in your opinion? what space capabilities should congress be focused on to ensure our space assets are secure? >> this budgets got over 30 billion i think in space assets which is critical and then the development of space force was critical in the leicester administration that is being carried forward here. in terms of the domains of what you got the traditional ones come lancey and and subsea but you not cyber in space. that country that has significant robust resilient capabilities in space is likely to have a decisive advantage at the beginning of the next war. if there is a war. hopefully there won't be. what we need? we need resilient robust and lots of space capabilities both offense and defense. we tend to invest in very, very high tech unique what sort of

satellites. what is really lots of those satellites. we need the ability to also if necessary to communicate. a lot of our communications, our gps systems rely on space. building that a making of our resilient, more robust and redundant, survivable if you will, and i think a lot of smaller systems in space rather than really big ones that if the russians and the chinese come out we would be blinded. there are offense if capabilities but we are not prepared to go there yet any public forum. >> thank you. can you elaborate on the cyber capability, the cyber framework? >> she worked. >> that we have in place in dod across the services or the department? >> we have unified command cybercom led by general nakasone whose dual headed as the nsa and that commit each of the services have component to cybercom and we have got cyber protection teams for defense and cyber team for offense. we have without going into a lot

of detail, i would tell you have an incredible cyber capability that can do incredible damage to an adversary on the offense, and cyber command in commendation with nsa does a lot of work to protect our infrastructure, information , information technologies, et cetera particularly in dod. >> the time of the gentleman has expired. now recognize the gentleman from tennessee for five minutes. >> thank you, chairman rogers and the like to think that witnesses today people's of like to thank the men and women who are serving in our military that you will have the honor to lead. i want to discuss some readiness issues with you today. there was a a poll done earlir this month by "wall street journal" and norc which is a nonprofit research group out of university of chicago that's entitled america pulls back from tigers that once defined it and without objections like to submit the poll for the record, mr. chairman.

so two of the main points that i gleaned from this word that comparing to 25 years ago the number of americans who rated patriotism as very important was 70%. now, .5 years later that's 38%. there were several topics, religious faith with 62%, now it's 39%. i think you discussed earlier we have recruiting problems -- >> excuse me. i did want to make sure that people know the judgment pounded iuc and without objection is accepted. >> thank you, sir. the ap says the army missed its recruiting goal by 15,000 soldiers. i think was 25%. the npc news says every branch of the military is struggling to make its 2222 recruiting goals. in tennessee we had a delegation meeting. we're having problems filling our academy slots which is never happened before. we used to wrap read way ty

good applications to deal with and we had to disappoint people. all that is concerning so i guess i think you both acknowledged that is a problem, and covid seems to be the most likely scapegoat that's going to get brought up today and certainly a con some issues. the administration made a call during covid that probably exacerbated the problem and it became more about following orders and keeping people healthy. at some point maybe it would be expedient to admit that maybe we were wrong and that we should reinstate people and rebuild the force of her lost from there. our country seems to send conflicting messages about what our objectives are whether that be in ukraine, what were going to do with taiwan, north korea, iran. i understand the concept of strategic ambiguity but sometimes the american people need a clear message to where we're going. back to the issue at hand, why are we having problems with recruiting? we noticed that a lot in the

news about wokeism ndi with diversity, equity and inclusion. we can maybe focus on equity because it should be equality for everyone should have a fair chance to achieve the same goal but equity tips the scales for certain undefined reasons that makes it easier for one person to achieve success and, over another. i think that affects morale and think it's affecting recruitment. i do want to get your opinion. i did want to reference a study commissioned by congressman gallagher where he asked navy personnel what they thought the problem was, and here's a quote from one officer. sometimes i think we care more about whether we have enough diversity officers that if we survived a fight with china. david gergen on active duty told the authors. they think my only value as a black woman, they think that if they only value but if you cut our ship open with a missile will all play the same color. the report also found almost 94%

of sailors and interviewed believe the navy suffers from a crisis of leadership and culture. sailors told the authors the fleet suffered critical loss of focus from primary purpose of this is critical considering the threats we face. general milley, i guess i'll start with you. you have served us are 43 years. you mention this may be your last hearing so when you're and sitting there with your fellow patriots who served and watched great changes occur and a military over 40 years can you look them in the eye, can you look us in eye today and say that the eei and wokeness strengthen our military weakened it? >> well, i would tell you the purpose of those programs is e pluribus unum, to build teamwork so-and-so forth in some cases they may not be working at the way but that is the purpose of the programs that i would tell you and i get her in the military quite a bit and granted as a chairman, lots of filters, et cetera, look at pink rock is

think but i've been around long the figure. i been on ships and planes and forts and basis et cetera. the military i see is the military that is motivated and the folks that are in the military we have the highest reenlistment rate in 50 years speed is i'm going to stop and that because it doesn't match the fact that we see china continued to achieving the military judge is an alarming pace and we can be chasing our tails were citizens of obsolete and her apposite to find ways to feed them before we get the system bill. it happened in space, hypersonics chipotle and even relationship building. our number one purpose here in congress is to provide for the common defense. i don't care how much it cost but we needed to efficiently. >> the time of the gentleman has expired. >> i agree. >> the time of the gentleman has expired. i do want to take a moment here to inform the witnesses and the members that about 12:15 with going to take a ten minute courtesy break but with that will move to mr. keating of massachusetts for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thanks the ranking member and secretary austin, mr. mccord, thank you for your service. general milley all the best in

the next chapter. those of us in massachusetts like to take a little pride in what you came from originally, as well as your predecessor. thank you for that service. now, putin has clearly made some of the most outrageous miscalculations of any leader in modern times. he miscalculated the will and commitment of the ukrainian people. he made a major miscalculation and not understanding the leadership of the u.s. and the commitment of the u.s. to lead, and he made another miscalculation in not understanding how our allies, our transatlantic allies in particular but even a global allies can even be on nato, how they have banded together. so coherently and strongly under this leadership. i've been able to witness this not only as a member of this committee, both informed by

classified and public information, but also with my service on the foreign affairs committee. where i shared and ranked on the european subcommittee for that time and engaged in very private and important conversations with leaders of there. yet there are voices in the american public right now that will say that our coalition partners are not holding up their end of the bargain. i informed by information that it had just to the contrary. in fact, it's quite extraordinary and in some areas some countries system in nature. but can you take this opportunity to inform from your perspectives the american public that they're wrong? we have people voicing those concerns and using that as a justification to say the u.s. shouldn't be committed to ukraine because these other countries are not holding up their end of the bargain when i been informed that they clearly are.

can you take this moment and for this committee to inform the american public that level of commitment that exists and how strong it is, how important it is and how very caring great weight? >> thank you, sir. i think you're exactly right. as you know i meet with the 50 plus nations, the ministers of defense of those nations every month. in those meetings what i see displayed is a strong sense of commitment and unity to support ukraine for as long as it takes. as a matter of fact that's the language that i hear them employ. some of those countries especially the smaller ones have given a lot in terms of the percentage of their gdp, and they are looking for ways to do more and when they run out of stuff they invest money in things like helping other countries expand their product lines. as we look to acquire additional munitions and weapons.

so the commitment that i see is strong. what i've seen them provide is impressive, but there's always more that we can do. you hear me consistently beating the drum for more air defense and other things in support ukraine. but what i've seen thus far, i've seen tremendous support for ukraine and helping to defend itself -- its sovereignty. >> general milley? >> exactly the same thing. 54 countries and obvious it is only 30 inada so those come from all around the globe. written in france germany finland and norway sweden estonia latvia poland these countries, romania, these countries are pouring their heart and seoul in. they realize this set is proximate to them. look up old how many refugees be taken and how many tanks they've done and they provide how many b&bs can provide opportunity done and there a major throughput problem logistics.

it's not without risk. these countries are putting in as one team and the others have the threats the spacing them. >> we're going to talk about inefficiencies and waste and not maximizing our efforts here but i want to raise one issue with a little time that's remaining. secretary austin mentioned aging assets being phased out. general milley you mentioned on-time budgets and the importance of that. i don't know if you have time for this, you probably don't, but congressional resolutions at the congressional resolution crf to cr, how is that handicapping to efficiency when congress should look to itself when we engage in that kind of budgetary effort? >> again as your essay earlier, you can't affect new starts if you have under scr picu lose valuable time in terms of producing the kinds of things that we need to produce in order to be relevant in the next competition.

so it's, again you can't get the time back. it's really will report. >> the time of the gentleman has expired. chernow recognize the gentleman from mississippi for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. my first one is a comment. i really don't but right now it is taking over eight months on average to pay a traditional soldier when they retired from service. that is unacceptable. when it asked the question i sent a letter to the service chiefs, the secretaries and they have not responded yet but i will tell you the response i got through other channels was that eight months is an acceptable standard for them to get pay and id card and tri-care retired. that is unacceptable that a soldier serves 40 years years and one of my friends served 40 years and it took them 13 13s to get in his first check. that's unacceptable. please help me with it. number two is chairman milley and sector also i know you are both huge proponents of this program but i'm at an spp.

stp. we have got to go head-to-head and work with the state department to make sure that we are the next generation of leaders in other countries that were using our military education program when we tried junior officers who wind up being sent down of this countries and also the state partnership program to use the resources widely what you guys are doing a good job. which is dedicated to that. the third part in what to make is have a lot of opportunity in south america and africa in the near peer competition because we're getting our tails whipped. some state department stuff, some i met stuff come almost think plug-in with issued opportunity with huge return on investment in both south america and africa. i just ask you look at how we can invest in those continents to make sure we're protecting our own shores in the near peer competition now my final question i want to double tap on

what congressman whitman said. we cannot divest to increase our power. i don't feel the sense of urgency with all of the dod in this quite frankly across the board. our threat is not 2035. if we are preparing for a war in 2035 we are preparing for the wrong number. we need to be prepared in 2027 or 2028 and we don't get there by subtraction of assets. we have to be able to fight tonight. i want to know general milley what are the shortfalls in munitions? i know you can't specifically but we need to be thinking what munitions emma 155 rounds. we're not when we need to be. other munitions for other systems. what are we doing to make sure we have the munitions to sustain based on the current consumption rates every scene out of ukraine to make sure we have systems and munitions to fight that war and win in 2027 or 2028? >> a couple points.

some big lessons learned comes out of ukraine which is incredible consumption rate of conventional munitions and what really is a limited regional war. if it was a war on the gran peninsula or a great power war between the united states and russian or united states and china the consumption rates would be off the charts. one of the projects the secretary directed me to do joint staff and other services et cetera was to conduct a complete review of our own plans and look at all the munitions estimates because it's those estimates that then form the basis of munitions and the budget at this budget about $30 billion into munitions. these are higher in munitions of war to make sure we have. if you look back the struggle example look back at libya. we expand and it was amount of precision guided munitions way more than people might fully realize and that's a really small contingency i'm concerned, i know the secretary is an you are correct to point this out, with gotaways to go to make sure our stockpiles are prepared for

the real contingencies. one of big lesson i think china learns from this thing is speeders come what i had to cut you off but in glad you are looking at. i wanted to highlight we are looking at those things. the files they want to as seapower cheer it is very important that we quit divesting in our navy to invest. it's also very important we quit chasing shiny objects in the navy with cape and chasing shiny objects, , and the use of lightship medium which the marines ask for. they had certain capabilities in mind. that's exactly what they wanted. they didn't ask and they are the user and so we have done this thing. so now two years later we're going back to square one to develop a system that is more survivable and protective in manned with the bigger crew with bigger weapon systems and that's not what they needed. it's that what they wanted. we don't need to be the pentagon wars in the pentagon. we need to make sure that when a service ask for a ship or

something that we give them what to ask for and not keep adding shiny new stuff and we need to maintain the 31 ship amphibs and we will not go below that and we also need to get that number of because that's definitely. i yield back. >> think that generally. i recognize german from new jersey. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you to all of you for joining us here today. mr. secretary, i wanted to start with you. both of you have raised these points about hypersonic technologies. you yourself talked about are increased anyway coast of long-range fighters, the 12 successful tests picky for from some of my colleagues raising these issues as well. i wanted to pick up on that. part of the issue here in terms of trying to deter competitors from using this type of technology is building up our own capabilities but some of it is also about our counter capabilities and defensive capabilities. i wanted to ask you, given the speed with which these delivery

systems can travel and the difficulty of intercepting them, can these weapons be effectively countered? are we putting in enough support and resources to be able to develop this type of counter hypersonic capability? >> one of the first things that we did in coming in speed is what you might the microphone closer? >> can you hear me now? one of the first things we did as a came in was to task our undersecretary for r&d research to look at ways to develop capabilities to encounter hypersonics weapons. that work has been ongoing. we brought industry together. we collapsed a number of special access programs and we really took a look at what it takes to intercept in the client pays for these types of weapons. that work continues. emanates a priority for me. >> thank you. i did have a chance to talk to

undersecretary. i think she doing wonderful work and i just urge you to make sure we are putting that the tyf investment into that. that is necessary because there are a few things to keep me up at night more than just seeing what this type of technology is capable of. general milley, i wanted to switch to you. in some similar type of pain but different profile here we are seeing a proliferation unmanned aerial systems. the capabilities to be up to deliver munitions. we seen in terms of recent attacks against our interests, our personnel. somebody systems are very small low-profile low-cost, very different than hypersonic systems. sometimes has an unnerving similarity to some of the rights of oversaw with ieds purring to 2000s in terms of just how prolific which took a tragic toll on us. i wanted to ask you how you would grade and assess our current capabilities to identify and intercept those types of uae's, uas aerial system.

>> as you know there's a lot of different types of uas, small, off-the-shelf, something you get at risha, all very sophisticated than we are for example. one of the typical characteristics are the relatively low and slow. they can be intercepted. he can be intercepted through a hard shoot down with a kinetic action or the to be intercepted through non-kinetics like you break the electronic link between that and the control station. a couple different ways to do that. we have a wide variety of uas systems that are in the field today. many of them in syria and iraq and elsewhere. it's an area for sure of concern. what it is though it's a subset of a much broader phenomenon that's happening which i would call a change in fundamental character of war. you were seen the rapid introduction of robotics across the spectrum. they uavs are just part of that and very shortly you're going to see the world advanced

militaries, united states, china, russia et cetera. you are going to see shifts to robotics essence in a big way and land see an error. at some point in the future will see maybe a third or more of the united states navy for chinese navy compass of the unmanned maritime vessels. unmanned some vessels. what you're seeing is a shift -- >> yes. >> to robotics. >> this is near i was very concerned about two years ago. i saw this continue to develop. i asked our folks to take a hard look at making sure that we have the best capability to defend our troops and inventory and we do. it's not good enough and we will continue that work. but also one of the team to get upstream and go after the lines, the change that enables this kind of activity and tester special operation forces to really bear

down on this and pull it together, an interagency process for lack of a better word. >> as i close, the technology you are developing, with the proliferation of this even into the civilian space not just in terms of military targets. your technology your advancement there cannot keep a safe everywhere here in the homeland as well. thank you. >> that chair now recognizes the gentleman from wisconsin mr. gallagher. >> secretary austin wonder predecessors secretary gates described his greatest success as a quote or on the pentagon that involved really cutting through the bureaucracy and spending 45 million to develop and field the mrap program which is responsible for saving thousands of lives in iraq. as you look at the problem we face across the taiwan strait, what do you see as your version of that? what is your version of the mrap success, the thing that you are

personally bird-dog and to ensure the bureaucracy is not slowing down our efforts to enhance deterrence across the taiwan strait? >> in accordance with taiwan relations act, as you know we are absolutely focus on making sure that taiwan has what it needs to defend itself, the right kinds of capabilities. pulling together what it takes to get those capabilities to taiwan at relevant speed is the challenge, and you see us and i think we may have talked to you about this yesterday, pulling together a number of entities to work at this problem set, more work to be done for sure but when moving out. >> what is, in simple terms, that even i i could understand what would be sort of the thrust of that effort? >> you want on the one hand, there's always this focus on going after the big platforms, the shiny objects that they are

very attractive. what does will take to to be able to defend yourself? the most, in the most effective fashion if you're a spotter nation. and we saw some of that and we're seeing some of that in ukraine. angst like coastal a christmas, cruise missile coastal defense capabilities, defense against armor and those kinds of things, and the treaty that goes along with that. but that's what were focus on and we are making progress, but will move it, will move it up faster. >> i think there's, there's a lot of bipartisan support for this idea of turning taiwan into a porcupine. in the members of this committee have confidence the secretary of defense is personally engaged in that effort and pushing the pentagon bureaucracy to deliver a deterrence by denial capability west of the international date line in the next to your? >> absolutely. there is not a week that goes by

that i am not talking to commanders and staff on the problem set, the challenges faced that we face with china, and me personally and so that is a part of our battle rhythm, for lack of a better term, and again i think that's what is going to take to do the kinds of things that you just described. >> do you think come with the appropriate metrics for us to look back on or just look at periodically to figure out how well we're doing and how will the building is doing, what you mentioned cruise defense missiles. what are the things we should look at that would count and measure over the next to your? >> well, i think in terms of, you know, their overall readiness, how the reserve forces are trained and their readiness levels, the kaiser training that the average, kinds of capabilities that the average

troop has and things that units are able to do, i think the readiness issues, readiness indicators we can point to directly to show that we are making progress. those kinds of things that you just described i think are critical. >> in the minute and six seconds i have left a what to draw your attention to an article by -- called xi jinping says he's referring china for war, and talks about four speeches that xi have given this month which have as one of the major themes preparing the party and the country for war, including reducing food imports down to zero. they rely on the work for 40% of food imports. military mobilization, offices across the country, combat casually hospitals in the profits closest taiwan. what do you make of this? do you take xi jinping seriously when he says he's repairing his country for war?

>> we take, certainly we take mr. xi seriously. but i will say that i don't think that an attack on taiwan is imminent, nor inevitable. having said that, we need to make sure we maintain a combat credible force that can deter any adversary from making a bad decision on any given day. >> the time of the gentleman has expired. that chernow once again visits the great state of new jersey, ms. cheryl sherrill is rr fiber. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i do want to express my thanks as well to general milley four is over 40 years of service as we know when someone serves the whole family serves so i would also like to express my sincere appreciation to your wife and your two children for the service. we do all you and your family aa huge debt of gratitude, so thank you very much. i would also like to enter into the record a letter led by

senator shaheen with 37 of our colleagues come a letter to you, secretary austin expressing their strong support for the department's personal policy related to reproductive health care. so i would like to associate myself with the sentiment and enter into the record. >> without objection, so ordered. >> thank you. as we know, about one in five servicemembers are women now, about 40% of them don't have access to full reproductive health services. i would certainly like to thankk you, secretary austin, for your commitment to support for these women, for our service women and their families. i will tell you that we've seen in my own state women making decisions about job opportunities and where they may go for educational opportunities based on reproductive rights, so i do think this is an issue that impacts recording as well.

and i'll say that in my own service, i served in texas, estate where now women don't have access to basic reproductive services, basic services for even going through miscarriages right now, which is been devastating for so many families. so thank you for that. i would like to applaud your support for that. unfortunately as we've seen a member of our senate is now threatening to withhold nominations for flag ranks, and we know how i think over about 83 -- 80, three and four stores are being withheld not to mention numerous commands we see upcoming retirements or movements. can you talk a little bit about the practical impact on readiness this will have on our forces? >> we spent the better part of the morning talking about the challenges that we face in this complex environment that we secretly, without the leadership of the senior levels to help us

maintain our readiness. i think this will place our readiness, overall readiness at risk and it will also impact families in a major way. .. to move up to the next level and command or do whatever they are going to do but we need their services at the appropriate level. thank you mr. secretary. and then general milley as you

may now i announced on the new committee on strategic competition with the ctp and i would echo the remarks on the need for deterrence and i appreciate your understanding and support for that as well. we also have to confront now the track -- stranglehold on the rare earth mini mart supply -- mineral supply. genocide against the uighurs and the effect that may have on their supply chains in the covid policies on the supply chain could can you provide an update on how the department is working to ensure that our supply chain and the defense department are manufacturing it in a way that is robust enough that consistent with their democratic values. >> i want to thank the congresswoman for your support for the chips in science act that really will allow us to

generate significant significant capability events for the year at home in the united states. in this budget we are asking you for $253 million to invest in critical minerals. $177 million were asking for her foraging and $125 million to invest in better technology. we are doing a lot to make sure that we have the requisite materials to continue to reduce the weapons and munitions we need. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida for five minutes. senate mr. secretary told senator schmidt yesterday that 8000 plus servicemembers have been separated from the military due to the fact they want to reapply and they are welcome to do so but they you would do nothing to solicit their

reapplication or incentivize. why is that? i think it's incumbent upon the individual to make that decision and we apply the mechanisms to that. >> you are overseeing in a work routing nightmare military and these are 8000 patriots and by the way your department broke the law in administering the fact scene and that's not me saying so its inspector general for the department of defense who wrote on june 2 at 2022 he found a trend of generalized assessments rather than the individualized assessment required by federal law. >> he did not break the law. >> it ruined the lives of a number of people to of people too and it's ruined the lives of people who want to reenlist. let me ask you this question if the way directed by force of law to reengage in incentivize their enlistment to pull backpay and

rank d have the capability to follow that instruction? >> you put the provisions of the law to enable those people those former servicemembers to reapply with the service mandate. good, we will do that and i get the sense that you are not reaching out to these folks. otherwise they would be totally able to serve personal pride is getting in the way. and the serious things that were not doing re-engaging folks in the unserious things were doing. i guess my question is how much taxpayer money should go to fund dragged through story hours on military bases? >> drag queen story hour is not something -- >> that's not what the record suggests.

the one that rams tight-end air force base got canceled. it's a drag queen story hour for children that the air force base of the great falls montana you had a drag queen story hour for kids and joint -- joint baseline we use this for story hour on a saturday for the first-ever kid-friendly diversity summer festival and at noah's air force base you had to -- a >> drag shows are not something the department of defense supports or provides. >> why are they happening on military bases? i just bases? aegis should he be the evidence. why are they happening? >> i will say again this is not something that we support or fund. >> you think hosting a drag queen story hour and a military base isn't supporting drag queen story hour?

>> i stand by what i just said. >> thank you may stand by it. it's the evidence over and over again to her you were of the -- biden's military air force base drag during showed drag queen story hour for kids. are you aware of that? >> again i will say what i said before. >> it doesn't support the fact general milley this is my last time to question you you mentioned two years ago you wanted to -- so my question is did you read this book? >> no, not at all. >> what is privilege is the book it is written by a dod official in the senior official of diversity and equity and inclusion and there are now hundreds of people in dozens of schools and i wonder if you guys connect it to the problems with recruiting. >> i've never read it and i've never seen it and i don't think about that stuff.

>> can we go to the next slide please? the next slide this is one of your employees in charge of diversity equity and inclusion and it's patently racist. it said she had to give care in the business and she talks about cause acid he and caucasian people. >> you are getting an argument for me. it's terrible and strong they shouldn't be doing that. >> should she be fired? >> that's a dod employee not a u.s. military employee. >> should she be fired general austin? >> again as you heard on the subcommittee this incident was investigated. >> and they are still employed. my time has expired. it's joint baseline lay langley

and military defense drag show is quote essential to morale and the next is ellis air force base hosts first-ever drag queen show. that's a breitbart piece and finally ram stein canceled library drag queen story time for pride month. >> the general time has expired. >> can i get copy of those because i'd like to take a look at those myself and find out what is actually going on. that's the first i've heard about that kind of stuff. i don't read those new stories and i don't know what you're talking about. >> they are now the official record. >> thank you. >> i would like to point out chairman are students scored the highest in the eighth-graders in the 4th-graders scored the highest in math and reading in the country so i want to thank all of our professionals who

made that possible. >> i hope you are not thinking that one. >> the jonas time has expired. >> 30. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible] >> the committee welcome back to order. the chair now recognizes ms. x. -- escobar from texas for five minutes.