I would just caution on another area in regards to the budget and imposing some additional costs on emergency care, which turns out to be non-emergency conditions.

I think together we can be more effective. We want to make sure you have the resources that you need here and are able to deal with the mission that we believe in: reducing disparities in our communities.

I want to talk about a few issues in the President's budget, following up on some of our conversations from your confirmation hearings and discussions that we have had.

I do believe that, for those of us, myself included, who wonder the kind of country that China will be in 2049, I think we're seeing that now.

It's not about development as much as it is about malign influence throughout the region, making China the security partner of choice.

I believe we have to be sensitive to our open society and what that does for our adversaries.

The INF Treaty is an important piece of diplomacy.

It's better to talk, talk, talk than shoot, shoot, shoot.

I'm concerned about the North Korean missile development and where it'll be in the future.

Today, the architecture is sufficient, but it might not be, in the mid-2020s.

the fact that we're talking at all has a positive framework around it.

I'm grateful to the Congress for doing that in this two-year budget deal.

I do agree that we need to look hard at the shipyard capabilities in the Pacific.

I don't. But I will defer to Admiral Rogers and U.S. Cyber Command, and that is his job.

I think China holds the key. And I have said before that China is the key to a peaceful outcome on the Korean Peninsula, but China is not the key to all outcomes.

I think we need to continue to focus on maintaining the technological and asymmetric edge in undersea warfare.

I do not. I mean, I have said before that I don't have enough--just the submarine numbers alone, I don't have what I need.

I do not agree, ma'am, today that we have an insufficient shipyard capability.