Ryan D. McCarthy and Barbara M. Barrett testify at a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee as the committee considers their nominations to serve as secretary of the Army and secretary of the Air Force, respectively, Sept. 12, 2019.
Transcript
Yes, we are one minute late. Good morning. The committee meets today to consider nomination of Mrs. Barbara Barrett to be Secretary of the Air Force and Mr. Ryan D. McCarthy to be Secretary of the Army. Thank you for being here today. We look forward to, we have any the standard questions that whether you like it or not, you gotta answer and if you would answer audibly so it can be heard, we’d appreciate it very much. Have you adhered to the applicable laws and regulations without any conflicts of interest?
Yes.
Yes sir.
Will you ensure that your staff complies with deadlines set for requested communications, including questions for the record of in hearings?
Yes senator.
Will you cooperate in providing witnesses and briefers in response to congressional requests?
Yes senator.
Will those witnesses be protected from reprisal for their testimony and briefings?
Yes senator.
Do you agree if confirmed, to appear and testify upon request before this committee?
Yes senator.
And do you agree to provide documents including copies of electronic forms of communication in a timely manner when requested by duty constitution committee or to consult with the committee regarding the basis for any good faith and delay or denial in providing such documents?
Yes senator.
And lastly, have you assumed any duties or undertaken any actions which would appear to presume the outcome of the confirmation process?
No senator.
As we’ve often said, this is the, I really believe we’re in the most dangerous situation we’ve been in, in this world, in my lifetime. And even if I ever thought I’d say I look back wistfully at the days of the Cold War, I never thought things were gonna have to be real bad. So we do have serious problems that are unprecedented. We have a national defense strategy. Did we bring the book with us? No. I can’t believe that. All right. We don’t have our book with us. Our NDS book, but this is kind of unique. It’s something where the Democrats or Republicans got together and it was total agreement on the strategy that we would use. And so we are locked in pretty much to that China and Russia have past us in key areas, are catching up in others. If there’s a time when we had our launch superiority that we don’t have anymore. And yet we don’t know sure how that’s changing. It’s a moving target. When President Trump assumed office, America’s main focus was counter-terrorism, but today, the United States is properly focused on the security challenges that we face. Years of budget cuts under the Obama administration left our military and the readiness crisis. The last administration even thought that we could cut our defense budget by hundreds of millions of dollars while fighting two wars and everything would turn out. However, that isn’t the case. This is kind of a surprising thing and I see that Senator Wicker’s not here yet, but he came up with a document that after I checked it out, I believe it to be true, that during the time that we were cutting our budget, between fiscal years 2010 and 2015 by some 25%, China was increasing during that time period theirs by 83%. People are not aware of this. They don’t know what that that’s going on. But these cuts left our military in a predicament to take years to face. Fortunately, we’ve got a good start. We actually did in the fiscal year 18, fiscal year 19, we made some great advances and we wanna continue those advances. So we’re looking forward to the today’s hearing and the two of you will be if confirmed, will be playing a major role in fixing something that’s broken right now. Senator Reed.
Well, thank you very much Mr. Chairman. I join you in welcoming Secretary McCarthy and Ambassador Barrett to this morning hearing an I’d also like to welcome Secretary McCarthy’s family, his wife, Jennifer, his parents, David and Kathleen, his sister, Shannon and his brother-in-law, Chase. Likewise, Ambassador Barrett’s family is also in attendance. Her husband, Craig, her sisters, Patricia and Jill and her sister-in-law Laurie. We’re all pleased that you could be here this morning. Secretary McCarthy, as we consider your nomination this morning, I note that you have a wealth of experience in defense policy and you have served admirably as the undersecretary of the army. If confirmed, as the next secretary of the army, you will be responsible for ensuring that the army continues to modernize and innovate in order to support the national defense strategy. As the undersecretary the army, you worked closely with Secretary Esper and with the army senior military leadership to establish eight cross functional teams focused on the army’s major modernization priorities, as well as establishing the Army Futures Command as a single command for all modernization efforts. Secretary McCarthy, I would ask that you share with the committee this morning what you have learned today from these efforts. Delivering cutting edge capabilities to the war fighter is critical for our country to compete with a near peer threat. However, modernized military platforms and upgraded equipment for our soldiers will be pointless if they do not have the training necessary to prevail on the battlefield. As such, readiness remains the army’s highest priority. Secretary McCarthy, I hope you will share with the members this morning what you will do to ensure that the army remains focused on your readiness if you are confirmed by the Senate. Finally hand in hand with readiness, the army’s success is dependent upon the men and women who serve in uniform as well as the civilians working in the department of the army. Recently, the army has had challenges in meeting their recruitment goals and as the army grows, ii should remain focused on quality of us soldiers rather than quantity. Secretary McCarthy if you are confirmed, I trust that you will closely monitor this situation. Ambassador Barrett if confirmed, you will face a number of critical issues confronting the department of the air force. You will be leading the air force during a major transition as the air force implements guidance, establishing a space force. Doing this correctly will have great influence on our ability to challenge near peer competitors. The air force has been heavily involved overseas since 9/11 and has been laboring under the day to day strains of deployments and high operating tempos. Given the concerns about supporting the readiness of our deployed and our non-deployed forces, the next sector has efforts at managing improvements in the force and its supporting structure will be critical. As a first priority, it seems to me that the Secretary of the Air Force should be focusing on improving readiness of the existing forces. In addition to improving readiness, the next secretary must have also focus on modernization. Over a number of years, many senior leaders have expressed concern about the size and relative modernization of the air force. However, as complicated as it is to increase the number of aircraft we are buying, buying more aircraft is not enough. The air force must also buy the right types of aircraft. Currently, the air force is on the threshold of modernizing several capabilities including the bomber force, the ground based intercontinental ballistic missile force, and the advanced battle management system program, which will place J-stars ground surveillance planes with a network of existing and new air and space-based defenses. Finally, the service sector is not in the direct chain of command for major defense acquisition programs, but the service secretary plays a critical role in the budget and requirements decisions that drive acquisition programs. Therefore, this committee will look to you for your contributions in balancing air force resources against the air force needs and ensuring that you have the acquisition workforce the department needs to get the job done. Again, let me thank you Mr. Chair for holding this hearing and I look forward to hearing from the nominees.
Thank you Senator Reed. Secretary McCarthy, an introduction of you is not really necessary. You’ve worked for what, two years as the undersecretary in the same position. You certainly know it well. However, we do have Senator McSally has requested to introduce Mrs. Barrett and I know you don’t object to that. Senator McSally.
Well, thank you Chairman Inhofe, Ranking Member Reed. It’s with great pride that I sit before you this morning to introduce fellow Arizonan, and my personal friend, Ambassador Barbara Barrett as a nominee to be the next secretary of our air force. Many of us already know Barbara for her outstanding accomplishments and leadership spanning from the business world, academia, to international diplomacy. A few of these include the deputy federal aviation administrator, serving as the US ambassador to Finland, her time with the US mission at the United nations. These positions make her a phenomenal choice to lead a military service branch, but her unique experiences are what make her the best choice to lead our air force at this important time in history. First and foremost, she’s a pilot herself. So she thinks in three dimensions. She always looks up and shares a passion for flying with the airmen she would lead. Next, Ambassador Barrett has vast management experience including leading teams through change. In fact, as the Interim President of the Thunderbird School of Global Management, she was responsible for producing the next generation of global thinkers and leaders. This global outlook will be vital for our air force as we adapt to face the resurgence of great power competition and the threats they pose to the world. Barbara has been a key member of the aerospace community for years, giving her a firsthand understanding of how to navigate commercial partnerships in order to get our airmen the quality equipment, technology and best practices they need, when they need it and where they need it. She’s worked at several organizations the air force looks to for analysis, like serving as the CEO of the Aerospace Corporation, a nonprofit corporation based in California that operates a federally funded research and development center for the space enterprise. She also served on the Board of Rand, which is one of the most influential think tanks for military studies. When asked by the secretary of defense to serve on the Defense Business Board, Barbara tackled the tough task of improving business practices and the DOD as a whole. This kind of macro level analysis experience will enable her to ensure air force can meet and defeat any threat anywhere, anytime. Ambassador Barrett has also been involved in many institutions focused on advocacy and education for air and space. Serving on the boards of the National Air and Space Museum, Sally Ride Science and the Space Foundation. Nearest and dearest to my heart, of course, is that Ambassador Barrett played an important role in one of the biggest paradigm shifts the military has experienced in the last three decades. Expanding air combat roles for women. As the only female pilot serving on the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services or DACOWIS, she was instrumental in recommending that women be allowed to compete for and fly in combat. In fact, the leadership of this very committee opposed the DACOWIS recommendations at the time. Don’t worry, the full Senate overruled the opposition, and I don’t take that personally, but paving the way for thousands of women like me to serve our country with distinction in air combat. We now know the wisdom of these decisions in part because of these changes, our military is more effective and more lethal than ever before. Picking the best man for the cockpit, even if she’s a woman. It’s because of individuals like Ambassador Barrett that I was able to attend the Air Force Academy and be the first to fly in combat and later command a fighter squadron. And this led to other airmen being able to meet their full potential. None of these first would’ve been possible, had not been for the experience, advocacy and the grit of women like ambassador Barbara Barrett. Proposing new solutions to an outdated way of thinking. I’m grateful to Barbara for her work to allow women like me to step up and serve our country and also honor to continue the proud tradition of Arizona women in aerospace Today, as we sit in this body that makes the type of important decisions, these types of decisions, I continue to be inspired by Barbara’s example who isn’t afraid to question the status quo. Always look for improvements, think strategically and acknowledge that sometimes, doing things the way they’ve always been done in the past may not be good enough anymore. It’s this personal understanding of what our airmen need, her intimate knowledge of the aerospace industry that supports them, her competence and her passion for the air and space domains and a consistent search for new, better, more innovative solutions that make Ambassador Barrett the best candidate to lead our air force today and tomorrow. Finally, I’ve been blessed to get to know Barbara as a friend and I believe she is the perfect fit for this job. And then I advocated to President Trump for that nomination and I’m grateful that he has nominated her. From our years of friendship, I can tell you that she’s a woman of character, vision, smarts, and he true leader who cares deeply about our country, our military, and our air force. With all she’s accomplished, she did not have to answer this call. She was not seeking this call. Yet she was willing to give these years of her life to share her immense experience and lead our air force into the future. Barbara truly embodies the air force core values of integrity first, service before self and excellence in all we do. And will inspire our airmen as they train and fight to keep us safe. I wholeheartedly support her nomination. I hope each member of this committee will join me. Thank you, Mr. Chair and Ranking Member Reed for the opportunity to make the introduction. And with that it’s my pleasure to introduce my friend, Ambassador Barbara Barrett.
Well, that’s great. Thank you Senator McSally. Beautiful introduction. We will now have our opening statements from our nominees and keep in mind, that your entire statement would be made part of the record so you don’t need to go over the whole thing. Just be rebate as best you can and I invite you to introduce any of your friends or family who have come to support you this morning. Secretary McCarthy.
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Reed and members of the committee. It is an honor to come before you today as the president’s nominee for secretary of the army. I have testified previously in front of this committee and I hold it in the highest regard. I wanna thank Secretary Esper for his confidence and for the president for nominating me. Yesterday, as we do every year, we paused in remembrance of the 9/11 attacks to honor the souls lost on that day and the subsequent 18 years of war. Just as the Pentagon buildings still bears the physical scars of the attack, we will never forget. 18 years ago today, I was beginning my preparation to deploy for the Afghanistan invasion. That day fundamentally changed my life and has brought me to this moment. The troops deployed in combat operations will remain my primary focus. I’d like to begin by recognizing my wife Jennifer, who joins me here today. She, along with our daughter Alexandra and the rest of my family serve as the bedrock to who I am as a person. They provide me with strength and motivation to be the best husband, father, and man that I can be. To my David and Kathleen, I wanna publicly thank them for their love, support, and enduring guidance my entire life. To my sister Shannon and my brother-in-law Chase, thank you for being confidant and friends who are always there for me. Finally, I wanna thank the committee for the confidence and bipartisan support they have shown the army and the Department of Defense with the committee’s top line mark, which will provide the foundation for a budget deal that provides fiscal certainty in the FY 2020 and FY 2021. We will work to maximize the utility of every dollar with ruthless prioritization and safeguard our most treasured national resource, the men and women serving in the army, DA civilians and their families. I am an avid supporter of the national defense strategy and will continue the prioritization necessary for it to be realized. The NDS serves as our blueprint, minimizing any potential turbulence as a result of the transition of leaders. This strategy allows for a laser-like focus against great power competition, while institutionalizing the hard lessons learned in counterinsurgency and the violent extremist organization fight. If confirmed as secretary of the army, I will continue to champion the army strategy and vision with an emphasis on readiness, modernization, and reform. It is only through the care of our people that these priorities will be achieved. I am encouraged by the retention numbers as a measure of performance. In FYI 19, the army met over 100% of our retention goals without waivers and we are on track to achieve our revised session goal without dilution in quality. If confirmed, I intend to ensure our soldiers and their families have the resources to thrive. This includes quality and safe housing, reliable healthcare and access to childcare. Taking care of the force leads to a better quality of life, retention of world-class soldiers, and ultimately, improved readiness. I’m equally committed to the prevention of sexual assault and harassment in our formations which tears at the very fabric of our institution. Leadership at every level must build a team of teams, protecting our brothers and sisters to our left and right reinforcing there is no place for suicide and sexual assault and harassment in our army. If confirmed, the army leadership will continue to build upon the reform agenda we’ve established over the last 24 months. Significant work remains to solidify the modernization enterprise and finish what we collectively started. Congressional support has immeasurably helped the army and I look forward to working with this committee and Congress to fulfilling the responsibility of providing the best manned, equipped and trained force our nation needs to meet its objectives. I’m grateful for your consideration of my nomination and I look forward to your questions. Thank you.
Thank you Mr. Secretary and Mrs. Barrett.
Chairman Inhofe, Ranking Member Reed, distinguished members of this important committee. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you with acting secretary of the army, Ryan McCarthy. I appreciate your fast attention to our nominations. I hope to build a relationship with each of you, should I be confirmed. I would like to thank the president for his nomination and the secretary of defense for the possible privilege to again serve our great nation. I would like to recognize my family who are here with me today. My husband Craig, the love of my life and the kind of guy you would want your son to grow up to be. Also, my sisters, Jill and Patty and sister-in-law Laurie, who all traveled from Western Pennsylvania. Senator McSally, thank you for your kind introduction. As the first woman to fly an aircraft engaged in combat and also the first woman to lead a squadron in combat, you know, firsthand what is required of our airmen. I am grateful for your confidence and your friendship. This committee profoundly understands the threats great power competition presents to our national interests as properly prioritized in the national defense strategy. China and Russia continually challenge free and open international order, impose their authoritarian model upon beyond their borders and attempt to undermine longstanding alliances. A recent independent bi-partisan strategy commission appointed by Congress concluded that the air force will be at the forefront of any future conflict. We cannot afford to lose our competitive edge. If confirmed, I would work with Congress and the administration to build upon our manpower resources to meet our national defense needs. The air force must not only retain its technical edge over potential adversaries, but we must expand it. If confirmed, I will continue investments in modernization and advanced capabilities to better equip our airmen to prevail in the high-end fight. While attending to readiness, modernization and reform, I will also work closely with our allies and deepen global partnerships. If confirmed, standing up a space force would be a key imperative. I believe we need a space force. In fact, in my opinion, a domain specific service to organize, train, and equip space forces is overdue. Most Americans use space before their first cup of coffee in the morning. Space controls our electricity, our water, our financial transactions, and of course, navigation, information and communication. While space is ubiquitous, it is also invisible and often underappreciated. American national power depends upon space and our potential adversaries know it. We must be prepared to defend critical space assets, increase the resilience of our space enterprise and be prepared to fight and win should deterrence fail. Finally, as we focus on organizing, training, and equipping for combat, we cannot ignore the readiness challenges close to home. We must support our airmen by addressing suicides, sexual assault, housing, and the quality of life. Much work has been done to address these serious issues and if confirmed, I would support and fortify those efforts. Most Americans tuck their kids in bed at night without a thought about foreign threat because brave men and women in uniform stand ready. It is because of their sacrifices that we all sleep well. As an aviator, I have a deep love and respect for the air force and the men and women uniformed and civilian who serve and their families. Our dad, Robert Harvey McConnell was a cowboy when he enlisted in the Army Corps of Engineers during World War II. Long ago, he instilled the importance of public service in us. As a result, I have always felt a duty to serve when called, I would consider it a supreme privilege and a pivotal responsibility to lead our airmen and serve as the 25th secretary of the air force. I look forward to your questions.
Thank you Mrs. Barrett. During my opening comments, I talked a little bit about our launch capabilities and I regret that while we were light years ahead through the previous administration, we lost that edge and we now have China. I’m very much concerned about what they’re doing. I mean, they just keep rolling on to keep rolling on. They’re developing technology that takes us a lot longer to tell. We have a different system. The give a gun and go kill somebody. But that’s not our system. So I would first of all ask you if you agree with the most recent national security space launch acquisition efforts within the air force and the senate focus on staying the course on the launch services procurement as it is aligned today.
Thank you Mr. Chairman. We don’t get to space without effective space launch. Fortunately in the recent past, we’ve developed not just a military and government capability, but commercial capability as well. We still need to have government capability and I’m fully supportive of the continuation of that capability through the military in the United States.
And also the fact that we stay on course in terms of our timing because any delay is gonna put them that much further ahead. Do you agree with that?
Absolutely senator.
That’s one of your top priorities.
Absolutely senator.
Okay, that’s good. I wanna mention one other thing too, because there’s a misunderstanding. We know that the air force has talked about needing 72 fighter aircraft. Well, when he came out with this 60, F-35s and then of course of F-15s, the main problem that we had at that time was the manufacturer, the contractor didn’t have the capacity to get up any higher than that. That’s kind of a moving target right now. We’re not sure where that is, but we have another situation that is on the F-35s that are out there, we have any that we would get right now, would be block three and yet block four would becoming next year. What’s your feeling on this situation today as where we are and where some of these problems affect our acquisition?
Well senator, while I’m on the outside and don’t have inside knowledge about it, from the briefings I’ve received, the F-35 is our future and we need it. We need it and we need it sustainably. So getting more of the F-35s has been something that the air force has been working hard to do. And if confirmed, I would look to continue that push to enhance that.
I remember, ’cause I was here at the time when we had the F-22 debate and the numbers that we were supposed to have and they dropped down. And I see, I don’t want that to happen again. We certainly should have learned that by that time. Secretary McCarthy, you know the job. You’ve been the under secretary for how long?
25 months sir.
25 months. So you know some of the problems that are out there. We’re not able to meet our recruitment goals this last time. Looking at what we’re trying to do right now, one of the problems that we have, right now we have the best economy, arguably in my lifetime. So that’s your competition out there. How do you overcome that and how are you gonna be able to meet your goals? And if not, what’s the fallback position?
So, to your point chairman we missed on the active goal by 6,500 in FY 18. So Secretary Esper and General Milley, we kind of sat down as a family and said we had to make a change. So we changed the strategy to focus on 22 cities across the continent of United States ’cause we need a larger sample size. We needed to get greater penetration into demographics where we started the trail and to your point with 3.6% unemployment, there’s never been a benchmark like that for us to face since 1969 and that was an all draft the military. So a unique setting and we’re competing quite frankly with the air force, navy and marine corp too. Their competitors, friends, if you will. But we all are competing against the same pool. We’ve gotten out on the road. Army leadership’s meeting with mayors, the superintendent of schools, parks and recreation directors, getting civic leaders to help us. We changed our marketing strategy and we’re putting more funding effort into digital marketing. So we’ve made a dramatic change. And also looking at our voice with over 150 different operational specialties. There’s vast opportunity for Americans to get an opportunity to get technical skills, money for education and truly get out of an environment where they can reach the middle-class, which we often say in the army is it is the escalator of the middle-class. So changing the message was the key in communicating with the country.
And I would anticipate that back when you’re initially trying to meet those goals, we didn’t anticipate having the economy that we have today.
We make those targets well over a year in advance chairman. So we had to make the adjustment It’s hard ’cause then do we still need to grow with 60% of combatant commanders requirements are the army worldwide. We have to continue to grow while demand remain so high.
Yeah, thank you. Senator King.
Thank you Mr. Chair and congratulations to the nominees. I enjoyed our visit yesterday. Ambassador Barrett, you and I talked about a concern of mine in this space area, which is the lack of rules as you point out, as sort of invisible and the challenges of a ruleless environment are gonna get more and more significant the more investments we and other countries make. There’s an example in the last year where an American company was denied an FCC license to launch satellites in the United States, but then they circumvented the FCC’s ruling by going to India and launching satellites and there was a monetary penalty that was assessed against the company for doing that. We talked about issues of debris in space created by either accidents or efforts to use missiles to knock down defunct satellites that create debris that threaten investments. As you contemplate, should you be confirmed the role of secretary what are your thoughts about what the United States should do to try to work with other nations to create a set of international rules that can be enforced to try to protect the investments that we would make?
Thank you, senator. I think that will be one of the important things that lies in the future. The air force would certainly wanna be a big part of that. If confirmed, I would participate in the leadership.
You indicated that you strongly support the space force. We did a good bit of work on that in the NDAA and I think that that will likely survive relatively intact from the conference from everything I’m hearing. You have many priorities as you would take the position. Talk a little bit about how you would approach the implementation of the provisions that will be included in the NDAA on this.
I look forward to seeing the outcome of those negotiations in Congress and building upon what Congress directs, I would look forward to participating if the confirmed, in developing an agency that is focused on capability in space, not on building structural bureaucracy, but instead, building the capability for the war fighter and for the American public.
And just to back to my first question. You would agree with me, wouldn’t you, that it would be very difficult for us to protect our investments in space without some kind of a rule-based order that other nations are also agreeing with. It’s hard to either have bilateral or unilateral rules in space because activities of other nations could jeopardize our investments just as our activities could jeopardize theirs unless there’s an international set of rules.
Senator King, I agree completely. Yes, we are vulnerable to the actions of others in that open territory.
Thank you for that. Secretary McCarthy, I have been impressed with the, well first depressed with the challenges surrounding military housing, but I have been impressed with the army’s candor about acknowledging them. Secretary Esper as army secretary, I worked with him in that, and one of the reasons I was happy to introduce him to the committee for his hearing for the Sec Def nomination was because of the work that’s been done. It strikes me as I think about the work over the last few months, including visits that I’ve made two bases in Virginia including army bases, is I’ve looked at a lot of military family housing, but I haven’t looked at barracks for E4s and below. And I guess if we’re really gonna be serious about the housing issues, we have to make sure that single individuals, men and women who are in barracks in the lower ranks, who are some of the lower paid and in many instances, most vulnerable, they also have acceptable housing. You and I talked a little bit about some of the military family housing issues as the army is grappling with those, what are y’all doing to take a look at housing conditions for all of the all of the troops including the E4s and below who live as single members in barracks?
Senator, we had to conduct a very thorough baseline to truly make sure we understood the problem. This has been bubbling since back in the fall of 18. Secretary Esper initiated an IEG investigation back in February of this year. We just recently release the results to the entire Congress. There was a series of recommendations about 90% of which we’re definitely going to implement. We had to get a better understanding of how we were managing the problem and that’s really what’s going on over the last couple of months. We’ve now begun to move resources and get better data and understanding of the health of all of the assets and the entire portfolio.
And that would include the barracks for single men?
Yes, sir.
Yeah, okay. You and I talked briefly yesterday just a final question. The recent study by the CDC indicates DOD spends nearly a billion five a year in obesity related health care costs. This is a national, not just a military issue. The health of the DOD for study puts the obesity rate within the army at about 17%. The army is now implementing a new fitness standards across the force, but talk a little bit about how you would help implement those should you be confirmed.
Sir, it really starts on the front end. We’ve extended the length of sessions that one station unit training, basic training to get more repetitions, more time for soldiers to get fit before they arrive to a FORSCOM unit.
And that’s the 16 to 22?
16 to 22, yes, sir. And then from there we’re working with the contractors that run our dining facilities to change the menus. So we’re working across that resiliency continuum from fitness to how they eat. And quite frankly, they’ve got to get more sleep at night. So going across the entire health continuum, we’re looking at how we can improve all of those variables. But it’s a challenge for the country with over half of the country’s youth at about an obesity range. We’ve just got to get healthier.
And military can set a good example as in other areas and anyway, thank you very much. Mr. Chair, I yield back.
Thank you, Senator King. Senator Fischer.
Thank you Mr. Chairman. Ambassador Barrett, when you and I spoke in my office, I felt we had a very good conversation about the importance of the 55th Wing, which is stationed at off at air force base and really the air force’s ISR mission that that wing helps to perform. That being said, the ISR mission performed by the air force is evolving and it’s evolving with the changing pace of technology and also with the threats that we face as a country. Given the importance of the information gained from the ISR systems, how do you see the air force growing and evolving this mission over time? And would you agree that future technologies such as network systems and the unmanned vehicles could work to enhance the proven platforms that we already have like the RC135 and other very high powered ISR assets?
Thank you, senator. From your position in Nebraska, we see that it’s a keystone to the ISR mission of the United States Air Force. And that is a mission that is only going to grow and modernize and incorporate more technology. So that is something that seems to lie very much in the future of the United States Air Force and if confirmed, I would hope to work with you in continuing that modernization.
As we discussed at our private meeting that we had that every combatant commander needs that information that’s provided. Every combatant commander that has testified before the committee, they mention the need for more ISR. So would you commit to working with me and my colleagues to expand that ISR infrastructure that we have so that we can put more of those assets into the field?
Absolutely. As are needed by the air force.
Thank you. I think you and I both agree also on the importance of modernizing the air force’s nuclear forces and the nuclear command and control infrastructure on which they rely on. I ask you if you would give me a commitment that you will make that nuclear modernization a top priority if you are confirmed.
Senator, I can make that a commitment to you.
Thank you. In your response to the committee’s advanced policy questions, you note that most of the systems in the nuclear triad have “exceeded their original design lives” and they must all be modernized. This includes the ground-based strategic deterrent and I know that the GBSD is an area that if confirmed, you’re going to be thoroughly reviewing. We’re seeing calls for changes to the acquisition strategy, but I would encourage you to please keep in mind the lack of margin in the current schedule as you acquaint yourself with the program. Do you agree that the highest priority needs to be moving forward to ensure that this program delivers on time and that we also meet the war fighter requirements?
Senator, timeliness and moving forward on modernization of our nuclear capability is among the highest priorities.
I would say it is the highest. Our nuclear triad, the deterrent it provides is the bedrock of the security of the country.
We understand that and that importance. Thank you senator.
Thank you. One of the fundamental issues that the air force will need to address is the question of what’s the force structure and the force size that’s going to be necessary in order to meet those goals from our national defense strategy. And put simply, we cannot afford to maintain an outdated air force. One that’s shaped by a low end conflict when we are looking at great power competition now and into the foreseeable future. I’ve been a vocal proponent of the air force, that the air force we need that plan that is there to grow the size of the air force and rethink the mix of the aircraft that we have. But I’m concerned that without resourcing, and also without implementation, plans like this end up on the shelf. They just go by the wayside and I do not believe we can afford to see that happen. What is your vision for the future force size and for the future mix that’s in the air force?
Senator, a great deal of effort was put into an analysis of what is the air force we need by my predecessor. I would think that’s not something that’s destined for the shelf, but instead, destined for implementation. Whether it’s exactly 386 squadrons, I don’t know but it would be something that if confirmed, I would be paying a great deal of attention to so that we can have the force structure that we need to pursue and achieve the mission.
Thank you ambassador. And thank you Mr. Secretary for your willingness to continue to serve this country. Thank you.
Thank you Senator Fischer. Senator Heinrich.
Thank you chairman. Ambassador Barrett, I appreciate you meeting with me yesterday and I think I wanna plow some of that same ground. And I wanna focus specifically in this case, on some New Mexico projects, but I’m sure you’re gonna hear about projects all over the country from my colleagues. My state was one of the hardest hit by the president’s recent end run around the congressional defense appropriations process. And specifically the administration’s plan would cut about $85 million from an MQ-9 formal training unit facility at Holman Air Force Base. A new building that is desperately needed to effectively train all of our MQ-9 operators. Were you aware that we train 100% of the active reserve and international operators at the Holman facility?
Senator, I was not aware of that, no.
Are you aware of the fact that current trainees are resorting to using duct tape to patch holes in the walls and ceilings at their training facility?
No Senator.
‘Cause I think we can do better than that. Did you know that because of these conditions, these operators are actually the only combat air crews in the entire air force that are forced to train in an unclassified, unsecure environment.
No Senator.
If this project doesn’t receive that funding, what would be your approach to make sure it receives the funding it needs?
Senator, I understand that the funding has been deferred and I would hope that appropriate funding is achieved. And if confirmed, I would would be—
Deferred is not a word we really use around here. It’s either appropriated or it’s not appropriated. And when it’s reprogrammed, it is no longer appropriated for the use that Congress wrote into the appropriations bill. So I’m just trying to a sense from you, how we’re gonna get these kinds of projects back on track.
The priority remains very high for that project as I understand it. And I’ve been on the outside, so it’s not something that I was a participant in, but I do believe that the priorities haven’t changed and that would be something that would be looked to for funding and appropriate action. And I would be attentive to that as secretary if confirmed,
Acting Secretary McCarthy, obviously it wasn’t just our air force bases that were affected by these transfers of funds, these cuts. The administration also cut an information systems facility at White Sands missile range. If this cut is enacted, if that funding isn’t received, what would be the impact on White Sands missile range and our global information operations?
Senator, as we discussed in the office call that we are making investments in White Sands to support some efforts in our monetization priorities with hypersonics and directed energy. The project specifically will be awarded, was to be awarded in the a FY 20 timeframe. So what we’re gonna do is look at options of can we put it in the 21 fiscal year to make the adjustments to try and do what we can to recover schedule and work with the contractors if possible.
If for both of you, needless to say, I was more than disappointed by these actions. It makes it very hard. Well it makes it obvious that Mexico is not paying for this stuff. Mexico is not paying for the wall and instead, we have real cuts that have a very real price to be paid in our military’s readiness, even if it only costs us a single year, which is at best and real impacts on the backs of our men and women in uniform and their families. So I’d love to know from both of you, if you understand just how caustic ignoring congressional intent can be to the kind of relationship that should exist between the administration and the Congress.
Senator, I would look to build a relationship with Congress that would be such that we could work carefully and closely despite adversarial issues and things that conditions, scarcity of resources and important national strategic assets if confirmed.
Senator, I’ve worked very hard to try to earn a bipartisan relationship with this committee and for that of the entire body of Congress and we’ll continue to do so, sir.
Thank you chairman.
Senator Cotton.
Congratulations, Secretary McCarthy and Mrs. Barrett on your nominations and thank you Secretary McCarthy for your current service and Mrs. Barrett for your past service and look forward to working with you both in the years ahead. Mrs. Barrett, earlier this week, just a few days ago, a number of F-15s and F-35s bombed in ISIS stronghold north of Baghdad. The operation here is all task force said they were used to disrupt ISIS’ ability to hide in thick vegetation. I have real concerns about using a fifth-generation aircraft to strike a bunch of terrorists hiding in the bushes. It feels to me like we should be using aircrafts that are suitable in an environment where we have total air dominance and our F-35s and their pilots should be training for high-end conflict against adversaries like China, especially when the GAO has published a study that says, “The F-35 supply chain does not have enough “spare parts available to keep aircraft flying “enough at the time necessary “to meet war fighter requirements.” This Congress has repeatedly authorized and appropriated money for attack aircraft that would be able to conduct such missions against low intensity threats in the Middle East at a fraction of the cost while freeing up the F-35 and all of those people who support it to train for those high-end kinds of conflicts. Do you share my concerns about using this kind of high-end aircraft for a very low-end flight, especially given the strain that F-35 has on it right now?
Senator, I can’t identify what went into the decision for that—
I don’t mean that particular operation. Just as a kind of a common-sense conceptual matter when we could be using low-end aircraft to conduct these missions in places like Iraq or Afghanistan and getting our F-35 pilots ready for a fight against a peer competitor. Does it seem to you like we should be exploring that option more aggressively than we have in the past?
I think so.
Thank you. And the Congress has said that we wanna see initial operating capability for this kind of light attack aircraft by 2023. And I hope that upon confirmation that you can make that a priority for happening since the air force has moved somewhat slowly on it today.
I would look forward to taking leadership and looking to move that along more quickly and to trading end operational missions that fit the equipment.
Thanks Mrs. Barrett.
If confirmed.
Secretary McCarthy, when you were in the army and when so many other people were in the army back in the 2000s, they saw a lot of artillery men conducting operations as dismounted infantry men. That was a reflection of the strain on the force in part, but it’s had blasting repercussions as our artillery units now have colonels who has lieutenants and captains who are again driving around in Humvee’s conducting dismounted infantry operations. Could you talk to us a little bit about the army’s plan for both getting our service members ready to conduct the same kind of high-end fight against a major land power, but also the new systems that are gonna be coming in place for them to operate in light of Russia’s decision to kill the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty and the successful ground-based Tomahawk missile tests that occurred just a few weeks ago?
Yes sir. I really attribute a lot of this to General Milley’s leadership over the last two years in particular where changed all the scenarios at home station as well as our doc training centers worldwide to deal with near peer threats, scenarios that we would see against near peer competitors. We changed our investment strategy, obviously making long range precision fires, the number one priority with almost nine billion dollars across the fit up to include north of a billion dollars in hypersonic glide body missiles. So, a vast investment from our time and energy and training as well as the investment in material to bring tactical operational strategic fires back into the formations. We’re also looking very hard at changing within MOS and strength to fill out more fires units. So a tremendous effort moving forward on the long range precision fire portfolio. Same regard as with missile defense. It has atrophied a great deal with 18 years of a counterinsurgency fight. A lot of investments there. We’re looking at some shortbread batteries coming online in FY 22, so there’s improvement and it’s on the way but we are still a short, if we had to go to war tonight.
Yeah, we are. So I’m glad to hear that and I’m glad that INF Treaty is now a dead letter and we can start providing our soldiers with the long range fires and they need to counteract threat from Russia and Europe, but also the threat from China and East Asia as well ’cause they were never part of that treaty in any event. Thank you both.
Thank you Senator Cotton. Senator Reed.
Well thank you very much Mr. Chairman. I apologize, there’s a simultaneous Appropriations Committee hearing and I had to attend. But Secretary McCarthy let me raise an issue which is non-exclusive, unfortunately, the animate applies to the air force in every service that’s sexual assault and misconduct. And I believe several years ago, General (mumbles) the chief of staff and Secretary Magee took a step forward in terms of requiring on the efficiency report, an actual affirmative evaluation of the individual soldiers, adherence to policies and also training, but I think what’s happened in the interim is it becomes more of a literally check the box and the training, particularly computer training, what I’ve heard is it’s someone’s sitting at their desk and again, checking X’s and Ys, while they’re probably playing Free Cell on another device and this has to be squad leader, if it’s a squad, company commander, that company face to face. It’s very important and it’s not an issue of political correctness. This is at the ethic and the ethos of the military. Soldiers don’t exploit other soldiers. They protect them. Can you comment about on what you can do and hopefully, inspire other services to do? I’m addressing (mumbles)
Yes sir. This is, as we discussed in our office call and this is a lot of where General McConville and certain Major Grinstein really wanna look at changing the way we’re training. Because clearly, the trend’s going in the wrong way, the wrong direction. Very encouraged by the feedback that we received from the Gerald Daryl Williams did an event up at West Point a few weeks ago and he changed, he brought in outside experts and they changed it and they did scenario-based training in front of rooms full with people. So we’re getting away from kind of the compliance on an iPad or PowerPoint and making it much more interactive because clearly, the methods we’ve been using aren’t working.
Thank you. Ambassador, again, I think this an issue that you will have to attend to in the air force, but I wanna focus on another issue and that is one that we spoke about at our meeting. Sustainment is becoming a more critical aspect. In fact there are numbers suggestion that 60 to 80% of the life cycle cost of a platform is sustainment cost, not the production costs, but sustainment cost. And this is what huge pressure on the F-35, I think Senator Cotton comments are very, very insightful about how we’re using this aircraft since I’m told $35,000 an hour to keep an F-35 in a year. And if we’re going after some folks in the bush with $35,000, now that’s tough. But it comes down to an issue of numbers. The air force would like to see 1,763 F-35 aircraft, but if it costs $35,000 an hour, how can we afford that going forward? So you have any ideas about reducing the life cycle costs to the F-35, the sustainment cost?
Sir, as we talked in the office, it would be getting those flight hour costs down would be one of the things that I would give a high priority to. The F-35’s an important element of the arsenal and we need the capability but the cost for flight hours seems extremely high. I would use the background that I have to work to get that, to negotiate and build the capabilities so that the aircraft could be flown with less expense.
One of the cost factors is that there’s the logistical support for the F-35. It’s the automatic logistics information system and of course, it has an acronym ALIS. Are you familiar with the ALIS Program?
Only loosely.
And so at this point it’d be very difficult for you to talk about any specific changes that you would direct in terms of total overall sustainment as well as specific relation to the ALIS Program.
From the outside, the details of that sort I’m not privy to them, but that is exactly the kind of thing that we should be paying attention to if I am confirmed.
Thank you. Thank you Mr. Chairman.
Thank you Senator Reed. (mumbles)
Thank you Mr. Chair and thank you both for being here today. Mr. Secretary, I appreciate your prior service and your willingness to continue in yet a different role for our United States Army. Thank you very much for that. And ambassador, thank you very much for being willing to step forward and fill in at a very exciting time for our air force as we advance on space for us. So thank you very much for that and for your wonderful families. Thank you for accompanying today as well. We appreciate that. I want to continue down the road that Ranking Member Reed was on in discussing sexual assault within our military. And this is a scourge that we absolutely must push against and bring to an end. The shift that we’ve seen in our military culture is difficult to stomach. And I think those that are in positions of leadership and responsibility really need to see this through. They need to make sure that we are addressing the situation with the seriousness that it requires. And Mr. Secretary, you spoke of West Point and the event that that General Williams held there and I was able to participate in that event on this last Monday. They had an honorable living stand down day and it was an entire day dedicated at West Point to addressing this issue of sexual harassment and sexual assault. And it addressed the attitudes and behaviors that are inconsistent with our army values that are degrading readiness. We see that across the force, not just at West Point. But you are right and that they had role players and ways of challenging the cadets in their thinking. And I think that this event was very, very effective to see the looks on the faces of some of the cadets as they had to respond to different scenarios. It was engaging their brains, which is not what we’ve seen in the past with clicking through a bunch of PowerPoint slides. So I’m excited to see the results as we move through this grand experiment and see if it works and shows a change in attitude. But for both of you, if you’re confirmed, what else would you like to see that would change the culture that we see existing in our military today? What else can we be doing to effect that change?
Senator, it’s a lot of, when teams have more time to train together, when they’re with each other, they’re in the chow hall or they’re training together, they get to know each other better. And much of the challenges that I’ve seen in the last 24, five months as the chief management officer is just too much reporting, too much compliance, and we take them away from doing the core elements of the job. The things that I remember as a junior officer in our unit was how much I ate breakfast and lunch and dinner with my teammates. I was with them all the time. They knew my family, they knew my friends. We do that in the Pentagon. General McConville, General Milley, Dr. Esper and I, we eat breakfast or lunch or go to the gym. They know when I’m tired and I needed a cup of coffee. And so that’s really what it comes down to. And Dr. Esper and General Milley started this about a year ago, taking requirements away, brigade and below to allowing more cohesive teams to be built, and that’s where the trust, the foundation of of great units is where it’s really codified. And so we need to do more of that. And then in the end, a type of interactive training you described it, that’s what we do the for anything in our business.
Thank you. Know your soldiers. Ambassador.
Senator, thanks. The scourge as you described it of sexual assault cannot be tolerated in an environment where we entrust our military soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines with extraordinary power. Sir, I have taken action. I investigated a sexual assault claim in a previous role and I fired a top leader for that action. It is a zero-tolerance matter in my view and it’s something that if confirmed, I would take very seriously. I believe there is a value of having women in leadership roles where women then feel comfortable to step forward if there are problems of that sort.
Well, I do appreciate it and I think both of you have hit on some key components there. One, we need to know our teams, we need to know are our soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines and spending that quality time and exhibiting the necessary leadership to make sure that we are identifying those issues and then bringing solutions to the table for those issues. Thank you both very much. I look forward to your confirmations.
Thank you Senator Ernst. Senator Jones.
Thank you Mr. Chairman and thank you both of our nominees for being here and thank you for your service and your willing to serve. I think Senator Kaine alluded to this a minute ago and I wanna kind of go back to it a little bit. We’ve had multiple hearings here this year to uncover and address persistent and unacceptable problems our service members and their families have experienced in privatized housing on military basis. We have seen that in Alabama and we’ve seen it across the country. The root causes of these problems seem to continue to be uncovered. As respective services, you hope to lead, provide reports and briefings to members of Congress and my staff. My takeaway from these reports is that we’re finally applying some really needed focus to get this right, but we still have a long, long way to go. We are trying to address this in our NDAA and hopefully, that language will stay in there. But I’d like to ask each of you. Can we get a commitment from each of you that if confirmed that you will continue the service, each of your services focus on addressing these issues, ensuring our military members and families are provided the housing that they deserve. The transparency, the responsiveness that we believe and I think all members of this committee are I believe are important to our family members and the wellbeing in the military, in addition to our modernization. Secretary McCarthy.
Yes, senator. I tried to exhibit that very type of behavior just about a week ago when we released the IEG investigation to the entire Congress. We have a series of recommendations from the IEG that are in the same spirit as the legislation that you just referred to. We’re taking the appropriate actions now are starting to fall into place ’cause we, as I mentioned earlier, we’ve baselined ourselves against the problem because quite frankly, it’s not just the army. The entire department, we weren’t managing the contractor as well as we should have, with the level of diligence that we should. Years ago we took out the chain of command from the process and that you can’t empower leaders if you take away their authorities and you take away their ability to measure the problem set. So we have to do better. This is a quality of life issue and retention for our soldiers. So it will be top of mind every day for the rest of my tenure if confirmed.
Thank you. Ambassador Bayer.
Yes, Senator. Much like the army, I understand the United States Air Force has been doing a significant effort in corrective action to the deplorable conditions that our families have been subjected to. If confirmed, I would continue that and possibly accelerate the rate if possible.
All right, thank you both. I guess Secretary McCarthy, I’ll ask you first, but it probably appropriate for Ambassador Barrett as well. Going back to question that Senator Heinrich asked about specific programs that are being deferred out of New Mexico, we’ve only had one, it seems like the Anniston Army Depot when there was difference to defer money and push money over to the southern border. It was a critical maintenance project in Anniston. And I know that there’s a lot of these projects and it’s a lot of money. And instead of focusing, I’d like to ask Secretary McCarthy if you think that, I’m sure you’re familiar with it, how that might affect Anniston, but in a broader view, I’d like for each of you to discuss a little bit of your view on how the deferral of all of these projects as a whole and the possibility of future deferrals might affect the military. Let’s take it away from the congressional appropriations process. But how is the deferral of money that’s been appropriated, billions of dollars going to a project, more of a political project and away from our military, how would that affect Anniston as well as as a whole.
Senator the deferral with respect to Anniston, we’re gonna award that project FY 20. It could potentially threaten schedule depending on whether or not we could find another funding mechanism and then recover schedule over time. It has presented some turbulence. We’re trying to manage our way through this and we’ll look at the various funding vehicles that we have and we re-propose those projects according. They’re all very important and we intend to continue to work this and find solutions.
Exactly the same with the air force, senator. We would be looking to find funding to make those priority topics, those priority issues go forward.
Well, thank you both. And again, thank you for your service and willingness to serve. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you. Senator Jones, Senator Tillis.
Thank you Mr. Chairman. Mrs. Barrett, you know what, I talked a little bit about this when you were in my office. Thank you for your time. First off, I don’t know you as well. As Senator McSally, but I’m fully confident that you’re gonna do a great job. And one of the areas that we talked about in the committee was about something that started in the air force almost 11 years ago now. It was this document. 680-page document to define the next generation handgun for the Department of Defense. And then went through the army says they finally had to take it over to get the job done by the way. But it then went through a process of procurement and acquisition that took about 10 years. It was finally selected and now it’s gonna take about 10 years to get it fully deployed when we’ll need the next generation handgun. Now, when I first started, I’d taken this document 680 pages and bringing it before the committee. I had some folks in acquisition over in DOD say, but it’s only 40 pages of specifications. So my question to them was, are all the other pages intentionally left blank? Do they have requirements that the suppliers can just dismiss and only focus on those 40 pages? And we all know the answer to that. I wanna make sure that we figure out a way to acquire appropriate to the risk and the sophistication of whatever it is we’re acquiring. I fully expect we probably had an RFP that was 300 pages long for the next generation paper clip. I’m not gonna look for that, but I could see that. Tell me what you think we’re already doing to address this. We discussed this in the office and give me your assurance that these sorts of things and these ways that could be put to more capabilities and better preparing our men and women in uniform. Tell me a little bit about it and then Secretary McCarthy, I’m gonna touch on I housing with you.
Thank you Senator. I think most would agree that the acquisition system has been broken. I credit my predecessor as secretary of the air force for having really tackled that problem and what you evidence there from 10 years ago, let’s hope it’s better now and it would be something we’d look to get better if I’m confirmed during my tenure. Secretary Wilson, I understand, took the acquisition approval process with the leadership of Dr. Will Roper from 14 approval levels to four. That cuts out who knows how much paper, but a lot of hands moving through it and adds to the responsibility that each of those four have for getting it right.
Well, once you’re confirmed, I’d love to come over and visit with you as I mentioned in my office so that we can sit down and look at these specific things around the business of the DOD that we not only have to fix and not once and done, but the continuous improvement initiatives that can convince me that we don’t get it right at a point in time and then 10 years from now, we’re back to this unacceptable process. Secretary Ryan, you and I had a great discussion in the office, it’s been great working with you over the past couple of years and I’m gonna support your nomination. Tell me a little bit about what you experienced down at Fort Bragg and the progress that we’re making on housing.
Senator, I was disappointed. I went to the Pope Housing project in particular and where there were some families that experienced some carbon monoxide leaks. I went specifically to one of the homes in particular. The solutions were not adequate and so the progress is not moving fast enough.
Well, we’re going to, I told you back down there, I just did a town hall with a couple of hundred people down at Camp Lajune about a month ago. We had this remarkable phenomenon every time I go down there and the three or four weeks before I get there, we say a lot of service requests for the men and women in housing go down. But we’ve got to continue to work on the systematic changes and Congress through sequestration, the department by taking a tie off the ball. Everybody, there’s no one person to blame here, but we’ve got to continue to measure the progress and I spoke with Senator Kaine earlier about the bill of rights that I’ll look forward to us getting into place and just continuing to pound on this and just let the families know that at Fort Bragg here, that I plan on doing a town hall down there again in about a month and I hope they’re working on those service requests down. I look forward to working with both of you on addressing what I consider to be unacceptable family housing and I have full confidence in you all. We’ll get it right. Thank you.
Thank you sir.
Thank you Senator Tillis. Senator King.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First, I wanna acknowledge the service of both of you to our country and welcome you to this committee. And I’m delighted with your qualifications and look forward to supporting both of you. With that said, I have a question and Secretary McCarthy, you may be better because you’re in the Pentagon now. Has a legal opinion been prepared by the general counsel of any of the military services or the defense department on the legality of the use of these military construction funds for the border wall construction?
Yes sir.
And could you make that available to the committee?
Yes sir.
Thank you. I believe you have been given an illegal order. I think that what’s being done here is a gross violation of the constitution and the fundamental principles of the constitution, which is the separation of powers and the bestowing of the appropriation and spending power on the Congress. Article I, section nine could not be more clear. No money shall be drawn from the treasury. No money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law. That couldn’t be more clear. Now, the fig leaf that the administration is using is Title X, section 2808 which talks about troops being deployed in a national emergency. But even that doesn’t fit because it says the troops, any expenditures in the taking out of military construction funds may be used for projects undertaken to support the troops. And this project has nothing to do with supporting the troops. They’re talking about roads or barracks or defensive positions to actually support the troops. I wanna see that legal opinion because I just can’t believe it holds any water. And what shocks me is the failure of this Congress to stand up for its prerogatives. If this goes through, it establishes a precedent that essentially transfers a significant portion of the power of the purse to the administration. Not just this administration, but any administration. We’re establishing a precedent here that will haunt this institution, I believe for many years. I appreciate that neither of you have a role in this. You’re doing what the chain of command reports, but I believe it’s an illegal order and therefore, I’d like to see that a legal opinion that justifies what’s going on here. One comment to Senator Heinrich’s question. Maybe the president, mis-stated he meant New Mexico is gonna pay for the war, not Mexico, because that’s what’s happening here and it’s not right and it’s not in accordance with the provisions of the constitution. Secretary McCarthy, the army has been going through a substantial period of modernization for the past two years. A lot has been accomplished standing up in the Army Futures Command. What’s gone right and what’s gone wrong? What do you feel is the things that have worked the best and where do we still have gaps?
Senator, we believe we have the organizational construct. The three pillars of the command, features and concepts, combat developing combat systems where the acquisition officials have dotted line in. This cross functional design brings the stakeholders together so you can get unity of effort, unity of command.
[King] And that’s actually working.
Sir, so we stood up the cross functional teams in the fall of ’17, and we have prototypes delivered in 18 months that we were testing. I fired the next-gen squad weapon at Fort Bragg last July. We are testing spike and lows. We’ve tested extended range cannon fired a wraparound from 39 kilometers to 70. The prototypes are delivering and we’re starting to yield results so that reducing the span time is everything. Five to seven years to 18 months.
Are there elements that we could be doing better?
Of course senator. I think that much of what we’re gonna see, the true litmus test is if the prototypes actually are the ones that we want and we wanna scale them, we buy L-rib troches is how the decisions will be made from the Futures Command at the senior most level when we slapped the table on a next-gen combat vehicle, the lift platform, making those hard trades up top when you start to buy L-ribs. So we’re not out of the woods yet but there is great progress in the way we have gone about the requirements process, which is what Senator McCain, we really pushed on—
And I’m sure you’re gonna stay up. I’m sure you’re gonna stay on it. Mrs. Barrett, just a couple of comments. You and I talked yesterday about the importance of maintenance and I think we should be doing a much better job of readiness in terms of our fleet of airplanes, getting them, maintaining them, having maintainers. We not only have a pilot shortage, we have a maintainer shortage. And also I would hope when you do the acquisition process, and this really goes for both services, that in this day and age we should be buying along with the platform, the intellectual property rights to all the parts of that platform so that we can 3-D print our own parts rather than having to go back to the manufacturer or go back to a supply chain that could be slow, expensive and inefficient. So I hope that that will be part of your acquisition strategy.
Senator, we’re investing in additive manufacturing where our center of excellence is up in Rock Island, Illinois at the arsenal. The challenge we’re gonna have going forward is the intellectual property rights as we work through that with major defense contractors for example. So may require some support from the committees of jurisdiction in particular.
[James] Certainly have it from this Senator.
Thank you, sir.
[James] Mrs. Barrett, you’re gonna bill the same?
Similarly, thank you very much. Senator, yes. The intellectual property is an important part of what our acquisitions need to have in order to have operability.
Thank you both very much. I appreciate and look forward to working with you. Thank you Mr. Chairman.
Senator McSally.
Thank you Mr. Chairman. Ambassador Barrett, thanks for answering the call. Arizona is the home to many important air force bases. As you know, the air force has been a proactive partner to identify bases of active and international guard for higher than normal PFS levels of contamination. Some of these higher than normal sites are in Arizona. Most notably just North of Tucson International Airport, where the 162nd international guard flies off 16s. Can I get your commitment to confirm that you’ll continue to partner with these local communities like Tucson to address this PFS issue?
Absolutely senator. That is important, the relationship between our military facilities and the communities is vitally important and this contamination is a problem that is not unique to Arizona, but is something that would be if confirmed, carefully attended.
Great, thank you. Also, as you well know I’m a strong advocate of the F-35 and the A-10. We need both in order to make sure that we have air dominance and air superiority and that we protect our troops on the ground who are in firefights. Can I also get your commitment or how do you feel about that and do you agree that we need both these important capabilities for our war fighters?
Our current for structure senator, requires both of those pieces of equipment and those weapons systems until there’s a replacement to do the job that the A-10 does and the F-35. Those would be core to the air force, senator. If confirmed, I would commit to.
Great, and I’d love to host Davis mountain and Luke Air Force Base as well, so you can get an update firsthand. One thing they’re doing at Luke actually is really innovative. So as you’re looking at bringing down costs of maintenance and sustainment, they’re doing what’s called lightning integrated teams, where they’re training people to be more cross trained in different functions and kind of own the aircraft. And it’s really cut down on the number of people involved, the cost, the time. And so I brought this up to Secretary Wilson and also a Secretary Esper and they’re very interested in it. So I wanna ask if I can continue to have your commitment to assess that and see how that maybe could be used at other bases ’cause it really is an amazing initiative.
Absolutely senator.
All right, great. We’ll show you that firsthand when you came out to Luke. Secretary McCarthy, it’s good to see you again. When we visited in my office a little while ago, we talked about a number of different issues, but one being the importance of Fort Huachuca where it’s got some unique capabilities for being our center of excellence for intelligence training for UAS training, for the electronic proving grounds. Again, unique attributes down there for asymmetrical capabilities that are gonna be so important for our war fighters in the future. So we talked about the commitment you have for those important missions. So I just wanna ask you, or you continue to be committed to the importance of Fort Huachuca and those unique missions that they have there and we come visit and see them firsthand?
I’ll definitely come visit senator. The unique characteristics, really also the processing, exploitation, dissemination of data. That is the core foundation element of what the RMI folks do for targeting and moving information on the battlefield. So it’s a crown jewel for us in the army.
Well exactly. But as you know, there’s also unique elements there in the airspace that we have and the weather for the UAS mission and then the electronic proving grounds is absolutely critical in electronic warfare range. So look forward to hosting you down there so you can see that firsthand. And then just wanna highlight, we had a long conversation about all those missions, but not just intel, right. Also those other missions. Great, thanks. And one thing we’ve talked about also is our range modernization and the importance with long-range strike. Both, actually this applies to both of you are modernizing the Barry Goldwater ranges and then also for the long range strike missions that we have at Yuma Proving Grounds. So I just wanna give you guys in the little time I have left an opportunity to speak to those issues and the importance of modernizing our testing and training ranges.
Yuma in particular for us, senator as I mentioned in my comments before, that’s where we’re testing the extended range Canton artillery are one of our number one, part of the number one portfolio for long range precision fires. These capabilities are gonna have greater ranges and lethality than we’ve had historically. So the investments into the Yuma ranges will be very important to us.
Great, and Secretary Barrett, the Barry Goldwater Range is where I train and train my squadron. They just haven’t really kept up with now the capabilities we have with the F-35. So we really do need to modernize them and just wanna get your thoughts on modernization of our testing and training ranges.
The Goldwater Range is a national jewel and I have been there to watch A-10 performance and it is something that is rarely replicable because of your space and from my tenure, number two at the FAA, looking at the use of airspace is really important matter. That block of air set aside is really a benefit to training for the United States Air Force.
Great, thanks. I wanna thank you both for your service and your willingness to serve our country at this really important time. I look forward to supporting your nominations and confirmation and I hope we do that swiftly and look forward to continuing partnering with you. Thanks.
Thank you senator.
[James] Thank you Senator McSally. Senator Duckworth.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to thank both of you for being here. Mrs. Barrett continuing on the subject of logistics from our conversation a couple of days ago, I wanna get further into the details with you. We talked about great power competition and the vast distances that we will need to position our forces across those distances. This highlights some serious logistical challenges that I brought up to you. I think we spoke specifically on the Indo-Pacific region. Our needs today are significant, but in a contestant environment, they would grow even more dire. For example, as I said, I recently traveled to the Pacific and had a chance to talk with several commanders of Pacific Air Forces. We discussed dispersing US air assets in the region to counter Chinese ballistic missile attacks, which would require massive intra-theater lift capabilities. As secretary, what specific logistics capabilities would you prioritize to make sure we can support our operational commanders adaptive needs in the short term in situations like this? And can you please give me specific examples?
Thank you senator. The vast reaches of the Pacific are presenting significant logistics challenge. They can’t be met with with ease and we have bases that have been helpful, but I have taken a special interest in that region. Many of us know the European theater from World War II, but two American presidents almost died in the Pacific theater. I’ve made a point of going to those points in the Pacific, the Guadalcanal—
I sorry to intervene. I only have three minutes. Can you give me specific examples of logistical initiatives that you will take to address these issues in the Pacific?
The air force has been building the KC-46 to do midair refueling so that we expand our reach. We need greater reach by our fighters and bombers to be able to have access in that area. In addition, a lot of what we’ll have to do in the Pacific, especially with the vast expanses, is to work with our allies and build greater partnerships in that region so that we also have reach.
[Duckworth] Specifically how?
Building partnerships and—
In what? Refueling, basing. What are you talking about specifically?
Both of those. And recently the chief of staff of the air force visited the Philippines and Japan and Vietnam and other areas in the Pacific to build greater friendships. I think that’s a part of my background in diplomatic work and that would be the way that we would work to have better cooperation. Them flying when appropriate, having our allies and partners flying American compatible equipment is a way that we expand our reach and our capability in a vast region of that sort.
So are you saying increasing foreign military sales of tankers and refuelers to our allies. Is that what you’re, ’cause when we talked, you actually said we wouldn’t really need to worry too much about logistics in the area to support F-35s if we actually put platforms in space or take over the role that the F-35 would play.
Senator, I’m afraid you misunderstood that. It really is important for us to have access in the air breathing region as well as space. Space offers great new opportunities, but it doesn’t replace our air breathing and surface capabilities.
That’s good to know. But I’m still trying to get specifics from you. What platforms are you talking about? What capabilities are you talking about beyond increasing diplomatic efforts?
Well, as I indicated, the KC-46 will have mid air refueling capability.
[Duckworth] Do you think we have enough in the pipeline now for the future needs?
In the pipeline, we have a lot more. At the moment, I think we have a great dearth of K-46s is in there. As I understand it. And again, I’m not in the building at this point. I’m coming in from the outside, but from what I’ve seen and how I’ve been briefed, it seems that the intent is to get a great deal more of the KC-46. The more modern mid air refueling capability in the air.
Can you speak to C-130 Juliet models and we’re abandoning that program and also in relations to the international guard.
C-130 J, Juliet model is especially important for its more modern capability and as a replacement for the H model. And again, it’s a asset that we’re looking to acquire more of and field them.
Actually, I think you’re ending the program in the air force, especially at a time when the guard is due on the H models.
The guard has been flying the H models and Juliet. It’s something that I will spend more time and pay attention to if I can be confirmed.
Please do. Because I think the guard definitely needs those Juliet models and I also just wanna close. Mr. McCarthy, thank you so much for meeting with me prior to the break and I hope that you will continue to support the Future Vertical Lift Program.
Our number three priority, senator, fully funded.
Thank you. Thank you Mr. Chairman.
Thank you. Senator Hawley.
Mr. McCarthy, the FY 20 budget calls for the elimination of 18,000 medical billets. That’s about 20% of the force. I’ve got my facts right, which is a significant cut in the medical workforce and is likely to have a pretty significant impact on the quality of medical care provided at the hospital and Fort Leonard Wood as you know, is already under pretty significant strain from a lack of assigned medical personnel. Can you assure me that if you are confirmed that you will work with me to address this problem?
Senator, I actually would like to go down and visit the Leonard Wood facility with you. As we work our way through the DA chain merger is what we like to refer to in the department, there are locations around the country where there is great health care outside the gate and there are other more remote places where we are challenged with the distance from the installation to the healthcare facility and then the size and scale of those facilities. So as we make this transition, some of our more remote installations will have challenges and that’s a place where we’re putting a tremendous amount of attention to ensure we get the appropriate health care that they need. But absolutely sir.
Great, thank you. I look forward to that. How do you, switching topics. How do you envision the army helping to delay, degrade and deny a Chinese fait accompli against Taiwan? And I’m thinking in particular here of long range precision fires.
Senator, our number one investment priority of long range precision fires from the tactical extended range can actually, artillery precision strike missiles, which is an attack comes replacement, which outside of the INF Treaty, those munitions could have range in the upwards of 600 kilometers hypersonic glide budding missiles. So we have an array of within the suite, there are an array of capabilities that will change the geometry within Southeast Asia. And if we can get the appropriate partnerships, expeditionary basing rights with partners in the region, we can change the geometry and basically, have the effects to reverse any excess area denial capabilities that have been invested by near peer competitors.
Let me thank you for that. And just to make sure that I understand. I hear you saying that conventional INF range missiles would significantly enhance the army’s ability to perform that mission of a blunting China, potential of Chinese fait accompli. Is that right? I mean, if I heard you correctly. Let me ask you this on the same topic. How do you see the army working with other services? And I’m thinking particularly of the Marine Corps to ensure that these long range precision fires and associated capabilities are integrated with the rest of the joint force.
For instance, on the hypersonic effort in particular, we signed a joint memorandum of agreement. And this is a joint interest program, not a joint program where we’re all sharing data, synchronizing the bys of material and sharing the data within the test regimes. So how many shots we’re gonna take over the course of the next 24 to 36 months? So a great partnership of working together, but we’re not looking at changing the fundamental requirements of how this weapon system will be employed in combat operations. So don’t wanna slow it down but where there are synergies, we’re gonna lock arms and go after it. So that in particular we view the hypersonic effort similar to the Persian capability in the 80s. This could fundamentally change the posture for us in various combatant commands and it’s a number one investment priority for us is something that really started with Secretary Mattis and has been, we just had our foot on the gas here, sir.
Thank you. Mrs. Barrett, let me ask you a question about air force priorities. The air force is on analysis as I understand, it shows that investments in C4 ISR, munitions, airbase resilience are critical to ensuring that you’re able to contribute fully to deterring or defeating China and secondarily, Russia. Can you give me a sense of how the air force is working with the other services to ensure resiliency C4 ISR in contested environments and particularly at the Indo-Pacific theater?
Well, again, I think the Indo-Pacific is such a vast area. In many instances, it’s hard to get perfect access to some of those areas. So alternate basing site opportunities and it’s especially C4 ISR is especially dependent upon space and that’s where the importance of defending, protecting our space assets really rises to the floor.
Let me just ask you this finally. If you’re confirmed, how do you plan to balance the tension between the need to invest enough in C4 ISR, munitions, airbase resilience, other critical enablers while simultaneously increasing the number of operational squadrons to 386?
So the balance is really the key issue, senator. It’s a resource constrained time and that’s where we just have to establish priorities and make sure that we minimize the vulnerability in any of those areas.
Thank you Mr. Chairman.
Thank you Senator Hawley.