John McCain

But the three witnesses, Dr. Labs, Mr. O'Rourke, and Mr. Francis, are operating at a certain disadvantage because you don't, as I don't, know the exact cost that's bid; is that correct?

Do you agree with Secretary Stackley's remarks about the relative ease on the whole issue of combat systems on the different ships?

Senator McCain pointed out, the cost cap was established at $480 million, with an escalation provided for the cost cap.

Such an approach increases the risk of costly design changes in the event unexpected issues arise during testing.

Is the Army, the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), or MDA looking at any alternatives to a Patriot follow-on system?

Is 18 months the full extent of the schedule delay?

The Army is rumored to be in preliminary program transfer discussions with MDA; is this true?

What steps can be taken to ensure that contractors are held responsible to provide quality products without unnecessary increases in cost?

Do you agree that estimates on Iran's timeline for ICBM development should take into account North Korean space launch and ICBM development?

Senator McCain and I filed a separate bill to authorize the project as soon as the project information was complete.

The story of this ship is one that makes me ashamed and embarrassed as a former Navy person.

This hearing, that was called at the request of Senator McCain, by the way, will give us an opportunity to get answers about the Navy's proposal.

If the Iranian or North Korean threat were to evolve faster than predicted, is the MDA ready and poised to expedite development?

DOD and administration are committed to developing and deploying the missile defense assets needed to protect ourselves and our allies from the threat of ballistic missiles from defiant states, such as Iran and North Korea.

I appreciate the administration's persistence against the numerous attempts by Russia to link missile defense to START.

This is a very important issue that is upon us in the final days of a lame duck session.

Is it true that this program is exempt from traditional DOD acquisition regulations?

Have you ever seen one quite like this?

What steps are being taken to ensure that the program stays within budget and schedule?

Contractor performance and a lack of contractor quality control is unacceptable.

Missile defense is a key national security priority and its importance will only grow as we take responsible steps to reduce our nuclear arsenal.

How concerned is DOD with the affordability of this program?

I remain concerned especially in light of recent press reports stating the Army 'MEADS is taking too long to develop and has become too expensive.'

The United States plans to deploy missile defenses to counter more immediate regional ballistic missile threats to our forward deployed troops and to our Allies in Europe.

The United States will continue to address stated Russian concerns over our future BMD capabilities.