Jim Inhofe

Given the budget shortfalls, is the Navy committed to purchasing only the most economical fuel for operations that meet mission requirements over the next 5 years?

The Army will likely have only $2 billion in our O&M account to fund the remainder of fiscal year 2013.

If the United States does not go forward with the modernization of its triad, isn't this tantamount to unilateral disarmament?

Reductions of the scale that would be imposed by sequestration would have devastating effects on the ability of the U.S. military to accomplish its missions.

If sequestration is implemented in fiscal year 2013 and beyond, and if the Continuing Resolution is extended for a full year, all Department investments will have to be reconsidered, including this one.

We in Congress need to know what's at stake if the budgets proposed under sequestration are allowed to proceed.

SOCOM will be especially hard hit by the impacts of sequestration and a year-long CR.

The Marine Corps has been designated by Congress as the Nation's force-in-readiness.

Our sailors, civilians, and their families are experiencing increased anxiety as a result of this fiscal uncertainty.

Reductions of the scale that would be imposed by sequestration would have devastating effects on the ability of the U.S. Armed Forces to accomplish their missions.

Sequestration may preclude the United States from doing this, limiting our strategic choices, and ceding initiative to potential adversaries.

I agree with Admiral Winnefeld's concerns.

Readiness is the aggregate result of balanced investment in the pillars of high quality people, well-trained units, functional facilities and modernized equipment.

The Navy will be unable to execute all of the naval force requirements of the combatant commanders under sequestration and a year-long continuing resolution.

The combined impacts of the sequester and a full-year Continuing Resolution (CR) would significantly weaken Army Aviation.

It will take us additional time to recover the level of readiness we believe is necessary.

Reductions of this magnitude would first prompt a strategic review and likely result in an Army with revised roles, missions, capabilities and capacities.

The combined effects of sequestration, continuing resolution, and OCO shortfalls have created a perfect storm of pressures on the readiness of Army units.

The January 2012 Defense Strategic Guidance (DSG) was written in response to the administration's decision to slash $487 billion from defense spending over the next 10 years.

I understand that because of the indiscriminant way that sequestration will be applied... the hidden costs of sequestration may actually nullify any savings anticipated to be gained through a sequester on DOD?

This committee expects our Nation's military leaders to be able to provide us with honest and complete testimony without political interference.

Ten years of budget caps from sequestration will produce a fundamentally different Joint Force.

The security environment is increasingly complex and dangerous.

The readiness of our Armed Forces is at a tipping point.

I find this an appalling risk to our national security.