We have got at least 25 percent of unneeded infrastructure in the Department of Defense. If we can't get Congress to allow us to close it, we are simply going to waste taxpayers' dollars.

Please don't use the word nonessential as regards our civilians.

If we find ourselves taking $52 billion out of that request, as would be required if there is no changes in the Budget Control Act, then the suddenness of that decline will cause serious problems.

Overall, I think sequestration is living up to its unfortunate reputation for imposing devastating effects on our military.

We hope that Congress will enact this deficit reduction plan, or an alternative that the President can sign, and then repeal sequestration.

We strongly hope the Congress will pass this plan or another plan supported by President and repeal sequestration.

This subcommittee's support is essential if America's Armed Forces are to have the infrastructure and facilities needed to carry out their missions.

I just can't believe what we are doing to the military right now.

I worry about our civilian workforce. I do not know--three pay freezes, furlough potential--I am not sure why anybody would want to work for us right now.

And if the President is going to continue to be the Commander in Chief and if he is going to continue to rightfully complain through his Secretary of Defense about the adverse effect of sequestration on our national defense capabilities…

Auditability also matters because, as you said, Mr. Chairman, it will help us make better use of taxpayer resources.

The most important reason that we need to do this, to achieve auditable financial statements, is public confidence.

But I would argue strongly we need the pressure that is generated by the 2014 deadline.

I believe that we would have been better off to jump in the pool and get a private auditor to look at what we have done.

We cannot fight effectively without them.

An overall sequestration was never a policy that was meant to be implemented. It's a bad idea.

It is best to do this with Russia. The Russian and the U.S. arsenals still really drive this conversation.

As long as others have nuclear weapons, we must maintain some level of these weapons ourselves to deter potential adversaries.

I am so anxious that we try out various pieces, get independent public accountants to give us their own opinion, and tell us where we need to do better.

I think you have to ask yourself, and Congress does, whether or not we want to treat one group of retirees totally different than we treat everybody else in the military.

If we don't get authority to do this, we'll face major holes in the military budget.

I believe firmly we have to pick some priorities and go after them, and we have done that.

Simply hoping banks work off these assets would prolong the economic crisis and increase the costs to the taxpayer.

We depend on the Congress for the resources we need to meet national security needs, and we appreciate your help.