I share the concern that when we fund contractors to do the same job we are paying twice essentially for the same work, and also undermining our readiness and Active Duty forces.

It is relatively easy to beat up on troop caps, or FMLs, as a flawed device.

So if anyone has any specific suggestions, any particular numbers, because that is what policy boils down to. If you are not for this, what are you for? You can't just be against something.

Not to put too fine a point on it, but lest we be more critical than we are forward-focused, I would challenge the members of this subcommittee, if they don't like the current FML levels, and as Mr. Russell suggests, it is likely that FML…

I share the chair's concern about the arbitrariness of any troop cap.

Now, there are band-aids here or there but really there is no alternative so it is not a question of if we had only done the Republican plan.

We are purely an investigative committee. And oftentimes that translates into pure political theater.

What is the cost and safety risk of deferring problems and maintenance, and what are you doing to incentivize addressing and funding routine maintenance before small problems become big problems?

I think the public would be very interested in knowing what causes a $300 million delta like that.

I am almost wondering if it is budgeting malpractice in Congress if for any new project we do not set aside funding for future maintenance.

I think sometimes it is called a sinking fund or amortization.

To put this in a more understandable context for average citizens, we had a Treasury Secretary once who said that nobody in the history of the world has ever washed a rental car.

We save $300 million by letting it be more polluted.

How does NNSA evaluate the cost-benefit of public-private partnerships over the lifetime of the facility? What lifetime is assumed?

It is just one of those inevitable things.

I think the key issue here is whether, in fact, there's a double standard, where some Americans are being treated differently than others.

I hate to see one of America's most distinguished public servants pilloried before this committee.

when a Congressman like Mr. Brooks asks you how we could get savings from the DOD budget, you might want to remind the members of the committee that we have banned the Pentagon from even thinking about any possible BRAC [Base Realignment…

There were almost 1,000 incidents in the last several decades of problems with securing nuclear weapons by the U.S. Air Force.

nuclear deterrence is the Nation's number one priority defense mission, and we must recapitalize our nuclear forces.

I have always been a fan of the Personal Reliability Program, and relaxing a standard doesn't sound like the best way to make sure our nuclear weapons are safe, secure, and reliable.

I hope if there is any wrinkle or blip here, that you promptly notify the subcommittee, because we are very interested in this commonality issue.

I can think of no better words to use than the ones you did, and I am proud to be part of this rare, perhaps unique, oasis of bipartisanship in the United States Congress.

This is a trillion-dollar subject here, and we have got to get that right as well.

We have got to get this right.