By the end of 18, well in the army be down to about 233,000 of civilian employees. I havent done the exact math, but its roughly equivalent to the percentage reduction we have in our instrength as well. We cant do what we need to do as an army without these civilians doing it. You were very gracious in noting that, but do have to be in balance. When it comes to the operational force, youve stated it very correctly. Were challenged on all three of those legs right now, frankly. But particularly given the environment that were seeing across the globe and the likelihood of that next unforeseen thing, which is another thing that keeps me up at night, readiness has to be our number one concern at the moment. Weve managed our developmental programs. We have set aside our major acquisition programs for major developmental programs for the 2020s and beyond not because we think thats the best thing for our soldiers, but because its required by this fiscal reality. Rather what wed like to have from 20 years from now because we think it may be necessary in looking at developmental issues where we know were going to need certain things, particularly for the soldier in the squad. Better armored systems. Better systems for operating in degraded visual environments. Robotics. Unmanned aerial vehicles. Better Energy Programs to both save money, but to lighten the load on our soldiers. Diminish the number of convoys that provide an inherent danger of getting water and fuel from point a to point b. These are absolute critical things for what the enemy may look like from wherever the enemy may come from. Our readiness continues to be a concern for me. Our metric is somewhere it depends. You can get an argument in the g3 is it 60 or 70 . But right now, were at 32 , 33 ready amongst our combat formations. While thats sustainable for a while, as i said and the former chief, if sequestration returns any meaningful Budget Reduction in addition to that what were trying to manage now or that next unforeseen of any dimension comes forward, were in very, very bad place. Ive testified should either of those occur, let alone both, somebody is going to have ask us to tell us to stop doing something. Frankly, as i look at the world right now, im not sure what that would be, so this is a critical turning point for the army and for the department of defense. Logically for the nation. While we are following very carefully whats going up on capitol hill. I agree. That was remarkably eloquent. I think the general made sure to make forceful and respectful comments, but come out swinging to policymakers as they prepare to think through how to fund the government beyond a series of shortterm continuing resolutions. I think he was right to do that, to lay down a bright red line in terms of how lowend strength can go and readiness and et cetera. The key to that was i think the link you made between readiness and modernization, to get soldiers better energy, technology, whether thats at the squad level. Its also about what youre providing to them. What theyre droiving in, remotely piloting, what their weapons and munitions are. I dont think theres that nuanced i dont want to pick on the hill as a block. I think on the policy committees there is a great understanding of the challenges youre facing. I agree. But its a segment of congress as you well know. A key statistic that surprises me every time i hear it is the majority of congress and its somewhere in the 60 range is new to Congress Since this administration. So if you were to go back, you wouldnt know the majority of the faces. You would know them because of your job but not from working there, which means the learning curve and the restarts and the educations its more frequent. We miss the carl evans and the gene taylors. We know the old bulls who were around many years with you as well, so it is a shorter cycle in turnover and policy space, which i think it makes it more difficult for a Service Secretary coming on board. I think the intention is usually in the right place, but theyre limited by politics and by the bca first and foremost in a lot of these situations. So putting on your politician hat, just meaning if you were on the hill right now and you were still ranking member, chairman of the Armed Services committee, what would you hope leadership who doesnt sit on these committees, what would you hope beyond reversing sequestration, would you want them to repeal bca . What outcomes would you look for . Look, im a recovering politician. Im not sure where i left my politicians hat, but you mentioned this. We are very, very confident and comfortable with the posture of our oversight committees. The members understand the plight, understand the nuances. Thats why theyre on those committees, because the other members want them to be the experts. If youre talking about the leadership particularly senator reid, senator mccain, thornberry, smith, i think theyre trying to do everything they can to help other members, be that of some duration, some tenure or otherwise, to understand this. Thats our challenge. If all we had to do was get our committees to act, whether its repealing bca or some other measure, wed be in far better shape, but thats not how this democracy works. Thats been the challenge. You mentioned if you talk to any member, most members, they will give due deference to the problems were facing. But in fairness to members and in part, this is a compliment to the United States military. Theyre not having to deal, thankfully, with a 9 11 or this is not a world war ii environment where everybody knew some person who served. Theyre constituents are worried about their next paycheck, the survivability of social security. The challenge is not just for congress and the leadership, but for us. Its to try to help other members and their staffs beca e because, as you know, the staff is crucial to bringing issues to leadership. Given the state we find ourselves in, we have not been as successful as wed like to be, and were continuing those efforts, whether its a structured one in posture hearings or kind of an opportunity to show our stuff in ausa, which is coming up in october, or just going to the hill every single day and trying to meet with psns, trying to meet with mlas and tell them to relates what were facing, were doing that. But if this were easy, we would have been past this already. One of my questions is on the aviation restructuring initiative. We were briefed on it by the brain children of it in the Army Active Duty service members, the officers. Its remarkably well thought through, just terrific. I know its been difficult to move through the system, but its the right thing to do. Its the right thing to do whether you had money going up or down, i think, for the army. So hows it going . How is the hill reacting . Whats the receptivity . Do you see this moving forward . Youve had much more success with proposing this to the air force. I commend you for that. I think you learned from their mistakes smartly. How is it going and what do you see for the next 18 months in that regard . I appreciate youre saying its the right thing. Right or wrong and i think you could get a debate on the right aspect of it, is the necessary thing. Im not sure we would have gotten to it that the point in our developmental efforts were it not for the budget constra t constrain constraints. The reality is the analysis showed us i could save us 12 billion in the life of the drawdown and operationally a billion dollars a year. We could just not continue to afford propping up the kaiawa. Our combat aviation brigades are some of our most hard pressed, and theyre first out the door. We very reluctantly, but inescapably, made the decision we made. Just to be sure, weve had a whole lot of outside analysis. We had formal reviews from rand and from cape at osd. Not always our highest praisers, but all of them said, as you did, the hardness of this aside, its done well. We are going forward, and the guard is meeting the requirements. Were somewhat constrained by legislative limits, but were living with those and we think we can continue to do that. But we do need to execute this. Its simply, as i said, the right thing to do. I understand the guards concerns, but weve not just tried to take from them. By the way, the vast preponderance of aircraft that will be taken out of the active component versus the guard, but we recognize they have a vital role over the last 14 years operationally. And the concern that ive heard perhaps the most often is they no longer have a combat role in the air. Thats just not the case. If you look at the combat support and combat missions flown in afghanistan, the vast majority werent flown by apa e apach apaches. They were flown by blackhawks. Were prepared to give them some of our most modern blackhawks. Not only does that maintain their role in combat and forward, but it fulfills a critical need in their title 32 missions, which we believe is essential as well. Weve tried to do some puts and takes to smooth this over. The guard continues to be concerned about it. I fully understand that. From the congressional perspective, we have the commission on the future of the army thats continuing its deliberations. I think its likely in fact im sure until the Commission Reports back and makes some recommendations or lays out courses of action for the congress that well kind of stay steady state here and well see where that goes. Thats a great point. Im glad you brought up the commission. I was out in death valley recently thanks to the u. S. Army. Ive been there for six years. This was actually at port e t port erwin. It was a joint Forcible Entry exercise. The army has not done one of those in 10, maybe 14 years. I joked we were seeing the marine corps of the army. It was all capabilities and equipment and soldiers that are the first to go in the first 72 hours. It was inner service as well with a heavy air force presence. It was truly impressive. I hope youre successful. Make sure you have more Washington People out there, observing. Our new Army Operating concept does a couple, i think, very positive things. Focuses on leader development. Not trying to predict 20 years from the future, but making sure we have tomorrows leaders who are comfortable in the unknown who can react rationally, but it also emphasizes the joint force. You in todays era have to present multiple dilemmas to an enemy. If youre a run trione trick po thats great. If the enemy knows you have 100 mile an hour fastball, theyre going to figure it out and react to it. The joint task force is essential. Were trying to continue to return to focusing on that. We want every branch of our service to be the best. If and when the need comes, to be able to operate effectively together. We havent had the chance because of other circumstances to focus on that, so were trying to return to that kind of basic skill set. I commend you on your outreach in education. I think thats so critical for the army to expose policymakers and Decision Makers to seeing the army in action and getting them out of their comfort zone here inside the beltway. Were going to conclude our remarks. Were going to open up to questions. Please wait for a microphone because we do have cameras here and theyll not be able to hear you. Well call on rick first, an old friend. You properly said you were a public servant. I think of you as one. When you came to washington as a Good Government guy, thats what you were here to do. I have to tell you quite frankly after watching you in congress you didnt fix congress. It was pretty dysfunctional when you left. The president blames me for leigh i leaving. I think you have tried to do the same thing at the pentagon, but i would say you did not tame the beast of bureaucracy in the pentagon as much as you might have wanted to do, so im wondering if you could tell me what you think of your performance. As you came here to washington, you tried hard to make things run. I think you were a pro worker, progovernment person at a time when i dont think most of the government, most of your party, is progovernment and proworker. And i wonder how you feel about that. Softballs are over. Good to see you again, rick. I remember when i worked in albany as a staffer the senator i worked for had a cartoon on his refrigerator in his conference room. The caption read simply, when youre up to your ass in alligators, its sometimes hard to forget your original intent was to drain the swamp. I went to the pentagon, i think, like most Senior Leaders with an agenda. We wanted to do some dramatic things in acquisition. We wanted to take some steps to professionalize and provide professional Development Opportunities to the civilian work force. And weve made progress there, but ive admitted previously its nowhere near where i hoped we might be, but reality kind of slaps you in the face in these jobs. Certainly from my time as secretary, when you walk in and all of a sudden youre in two theaters of war, that pretty much takes up the large share of your energy tank. And we have been working hard to meet the realities of both training, manning, equipping those soldiers to get them forward to hopefully keep them as safe as possible while theyre in that theater and get them back safely, but equally to begin to care for their families. One of the first things i found myself doing was taking our family care programs, which were 600 million, and doubling that share of the budget to 1. 2 billion. I felt that was a moral obligation, frankly. Theres a more basic reality here that todays soldier when theyre forward doesnt need to be theyre always going to worry about their families, but you dont want them worrying about things they shouldnt have to worry about, so we focused upon taking care of those families. And now were seeing such things as ptsd, the aftercare for some pretty significantly Wounded Soldiers and how they go forward, suicides, all of those things kind of say man plans, god laughs. It would have been nice to focus 100 of the efforts on the agenda that we laid out. Id be happy to discuss, i think, the progress we made in those areas that i outlined, but you have to deal with the wolf closest to the sled, and for us, thats been in a different direction. I guess thats more an excuse than anything else, but its the reality that i think ive had to deal with. Again, it has far less to do with me as secretary or any number of stars on anybodys shoulder, but this army today is the greatest land force the world has ever seen. For all of the very, very bright people in the pentagon in my mind thats for one simple reason. The young men and the young women of this nation continue to step forward and theyre incredibly competent, skilled, dedicated, and amazing patriots. But if i had one wish, i wish every american could see the true heart and nature of what these amazing soldiers did. I have to extend that to all the services. Were a fortunate country to have volunteers who will come forward and do this amazingly difficult stuff. I agree. Why dont we work well work right to left. Hello, tom. How are you . Im very well. How are you . Ask me in a minute. As one of the nations or pentagons top officials for its bio terror labs, can you explain why they have had difficulty with tracking agents like anthrax and why you ordered the moratorium days ago . I ordered the moratorium out of a sense of extreme caution. While the cdc and others have stated we dont see to this point any threat to human health and safety, when youre dealing with these kinds of pathogens, i think the better policy is to err on the side of caution. We continue to examine these. You asked me a question about how this happened. Im not prepared to say that. Weve got some partial answers. All of them correctable, but i think we want to be very, very sure that we understand as completely as we can the full picture before we come out and lay out a way forward. As you know, part of the moratorium i ordered included all the labs under my executive authority to retrain, to check protocols, to check standards to make sure that the people in various positions had the right skill sets and were doing things in the right way. This all started with a question of protocols, of the scientific basic protocols that you apply against these pathogens to make them inactive. Are they actually valid. I dont know if we know the answer to that right now. These are things that are very, very complex and challenging. I dont pretend to be an expert on the Science Behind it, but im going to make darn sure that at least in so far as my responsibility goes were taking every step possible to make sure that the public is protected and that we develop a way forward that allows us to conduct these tests, which are absolutely essential for the security of this nation and its people in a way thats as safe as humanly possible. Right here. Thank you. Sebastian springer with inside defense. I wonder if you could talk about acquisition broadly and two specific portfolios that have Unanswered Questions in them. The one being the next generation Ground Combat vehicle and the other being air and missile defense. Where are you leaving things and whats next in those areas . This is kind of like writing my own obituary. When i first arrived at the pentagon, it was no secret, certainly from my time on capitol hill, that Army Acquisition was not performing where it needed to be. So one of the first things i did was order a report that famously became known as decker wagner. I think its important to note that wasnt a gao study. It wasnt sbo. It was us looking at us. And while it came in and told us things separately that we knew, it was shocking to see it all in one report. And just a piece of the findings from 1990 to 2010 22 failed army major developmental programs which cost the taxpayers about 30 billion. You didnt have to be an analyst to know, boy, we have to do better. And so we kind of looked at how did we get to that place. There as there are these complex matters the army had a habit of investing in developmental programs requirements on things that are unlikely and never did field. So those programs just werent able to come forward, so we tried to rein in our requirements programs. After i arrived, the rfp came out with over 1,000 musthaves telling the potential bidder, youve got to give us all of these things. To everybodys credit, we kind of looked at that and said, that doesnt look like a Lesson Learned to us. It looks like a repeated lesson, so we went back and scrubbed that down to under 200 of absolutely essential things. We allowed contractors t