David Vitter

Mr. Podonsky and Mr. Aloise, I understand that if a federalization model were pursued the current forces would risk a loss in pay and perhaps their jobs as they would be required to recompete for the same job under a federalized structure.

Mr. Podonsky and Mr. Aloise, is the secure transport force subjected to a higher level of training than the protective force?

Mr. Podonsky and Mr. Aloise, how do attrition rates for the protective forces compare to similar positions in the private sector?

Mr. Podonsky and Mr. Aloise, in the Government Accountability Office (GAO) report you assert that a Federal force offers no overall advantage to the current model and that either option could result in effective and more uniform security…

What could we do, usefully, to push that a lot higher, do you think?

Mr. Podonsky and Mr. Aloise, is the Department having any difficulty in the recruitment or quality of the protective force?

I look forward to working with you to strengthen our ability to counter all threats, including potential terrorist threats to our defensive nuclear capabilities.

Maybe I'm missing something, Mr. Podonsky. Is that not within the power of the Department, to clearly, forcefully move in that direction?

I will submit my opening statement for the record.

Fannie and Freddie were a core part of what went wrong in our system.

This budget, canceling every major internal human spaceflight program in sight--most obviously, Constellation--extends their gap, as I said, to infinity.

Well, I'll be honest with you, I'm afraid they're going to look at the messages of this budget, and if they want to be an astronaut, they're going to conclude, 'Forget it.' That's my concern.

I believe this new budget is a big step backward, because of the, you know, fundamental problems I've tried to underscore.

Resources without vision is a waste of time and money. And that's what I think this budget represents.

I don't think you were the original or prime architect of this budget at all.

I will fight, with every ounce of energy I have, to defeat this budget or anything like it, to fundamentally change it.

I absolutely want seventh-graders to think about Mars, because that is the sort of thing that will inspire them.

President Kennedy didn't say, 'We're going to spend several billion dollars and do some really neat R&D.'

Again, I just disagree. I believe the consensus opinion reaction to this budget is that it is a radical departure.

Mars is the focus of our design reference mission.

I absolutely believe that this budget and the vision it represents would end our human spaceflight program as we know it.

The very lifeblood and continued relevance of our Nation's proud and pioneering space program hangs in the balance.

I will be a strong, fierce, and active opponent of that, should that be proposed.

This budget, as the Chairman very correctly noted, is a budget without a mission.

The uncertainty over climate change.