[House Hearing, 113 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, VETERANS AFFAIRS, AND RELATED AGENCIES FOR 2014
----------
Tuesday, March 19, 2013.
QUALITY OF LIFE IN THE MILITARY
WITNESSES
SERGEANT MAJOR RAYMOND F. CHANDLER, III, SERGEANT MAJOR OF THE ARMY
MASTER CHIEF PETTY OFFICER MICHAEL D. STEVENS, MASTER CHIEF PETTY
OFFICER OF THE NAVY
SERGEANT MAJOR MICHAEL P. BARRETT, SERGEANT MAJOR OF THE MARINE CORPS
CHIEF MASTER SERGEANT OF THE AIR FORCE JAMES A. CODY
Chairman's Opening Statement
Mr. Culberson. Meeting of the Military Construction and VA
Subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee will come to
order.
I want to welcome everybody here today to our military
quality of life hearing for our service members to hear
directly on what we can do as a committee and Congress to help
improve the quality of life for our enlisted soldiers.
It is absolutely vital that the men and women in uniform
that defend this country focus on their mission and not ever
have to worry about their healthcare, their quality of life,
the equipment, or the fact that the United States Congress and
the people of this country have their back.
We are delighted to have with us today as our four
witnesses, the senior enlisted members of the respective
branches for the military and the members should--it is
important to note that we have got approximately 120 years
combined military experience here before us today.
And we are very, very grateful to you, gentlemen, for your
service to the country. This hearing is a great opportunity for
us on the subcommittee to identify areas where we can help do
more to help you who protect and defend this nation.
I would be happy to recognize at this time, Mr. Bishop, for
his opening remarks.
Ranking Member's Opening Statement
Mr. Bishop. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for
yielding.
Before I get started, I would, just to make a note--point
of personal privilege to note that today is the 10th
anniversary of the start of the war in Iraq.
That was pointed out to me by my young military fellow, and
I think that it is appropriate that we should at least take a
moment to reflect on the fact that this is the 10th anniversary
for the men and women who have served so valiantly and
particularly for those who lost their lives in the effort.
So if we would, Mr. Chairman, I would ask for just a moment
of silence.
[Moment of silence.]
Thank you, and I always look forward to this hearing and I
want to welcome our witnesses because these are the folks that
give us the best picture of what the folks on the front lines
are dealing with.
We talk a lot about facilities, equipment, and strategy,
but it is the men and the women like the ones sitting before us
that really--we want to make sure that it is our responsibility
to take care of.
That is why we have of the Congressional Military Family
Caucus so that we can better address the issues that these
gentlemen raise today.
I want to make sure, as the chairman has indicated, that we
are doing enough to help our service members because the last
thing that they need to worry about when they are at war is
what is going on back home.
In all of your testimonies you raised many issues that
confront your services such as family services, recruiting,
retention, and transition, and I want you all to use this as an
opportunity to tell us what we have gotten right and what we
need to improve in order to ease the burden that is placed upon
our service members and their families.
In addition, as you are very much aware, March 1st marked
the beginning of the sequestration which CBO predicts will
reduce GDP growth by 6/10th of a percentage point this year
alone and it estimates that up to 1.4 million jobs are at stake
if sequestration is fully implemented. In addition to the CBO,
the George Mason University study predicts that it could be as
many as 2.4 million jobs lost.
And the sequestration was included in the Budget Control
Act, I guess to force Republicans and Democrats to work
together to solve the fiscal problems.
It hasn't happened yet, but while service member pay is
protected from sequestration, I want and I think the chairman
would like to hear, how it will impact the service members in
other ways, other than pay, because it appears that many
service members will have to backfill civilian positions while
civilians are furloughed.
So I would like to know how this will affect morale and if
you think it will have an effect on retention and recruitment.
So thank you very much for coming today, and we look forward to
hearing your comments.
Mr. Culberson. Thank you, Mr. Bishop.
Our witnesses today are the Sergeant Major of the Army,
Raymond F. Chandler, III.
Thank you, sir, for your service to this country. You are a
returning witness and were sworn into your current role on
March 1st, 2011 after 32 years of service in the United States
Army, sir.
And Sergeant Major Chandler has served in all tank crewman
positions and has had multiple tours as a troop squadron and
regimental master gunner.
And of course, we are pleased to have Judge Carter here who
represents Fort Hood, and I know you all know each other well,
And delighted to have you here, sir, and thanks for your
service.
We also have with us today the Sergeant Major of the Marine
Corps, Michael Barrett.
And we are delighted to have you here, sir, as a returning
witness.
Sergeant Major Barrett assumed his current post as the 17th
Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps on June 9th of 2011, after
32 years of service. He enlisted in March of 1981.
He has been an infantry instructor. He served in the Gulf
War with Task Force Papa Bear, completed two combat deployments
in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom in the Al Anbar Province
in Iraq and deployed to Operation Enduring Freedom in 2010, and
became the NATO Regional Command--Command Sergeant Major for
Nimroz and Helmand Province in Afghanistan.
Thank you very much, sir, for your service. I am glad to
have you here.
We are also joined by the Chief Master Sergeant of the Air
Force, James A. Cody. Chief Master Sergeant Cody is a first-
time witness, sir, and congratulations on your assignment. We
are delighted to have you here today.
The Chief Master Sergeant was appointed in January 2013 as
the 17th Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force. He has 29
years of service after entering the Air Force in 1984.
And his background includes various duties in air traffic
control at the unit and major command levels, and he has served
overseas in Germany, South Korea, Turkey, and deployed in
support of Operation Southern Watch and Operation Enduring
Freedom.
Unfortunately, Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy,
Michael Stevens, was admitted to the hospital last evening and
is unable to testify today.
I understand they postponed his surgery and of course he
was ready to come down here and testify, but we discouraged him
from doing so and certainly wish he and his family the very
best. And he is in our prayers and confident that between the
good Lord and good doctors that he will be back on his feet
soon.
His statement, of course, as will yours, be entered into
the record and any questions members have prepared for him will
be submitted for the record and a response will be of course
provided.
Also, the master chief wants to stress that he is willing
to set up an office visit with members as necessary.
I especially want to thank Mr. Bishop for reminding us that
today is the 10th anniversary of the beginning of this long war
that we have been in, the longest, as is pointed out in your
testimony, that the nation has ever been engaged in, leading to
long deployments and in many cases, I think, Sergeant Major
Chandler, you said five and six deployments sometimes for some
of the men and women in the Army.
I know as you have seen, Judge, a terrible personal cost to
them and their families.
And we look forward to hearing from you on what this
committee and the Congress can do to help ease their burden,
raise their level of comfort, and minimize their concern and
worry for the living conditions, for their schools, for their
families, for their healthcare.
That is our highest priority, is to eliminate the worries
that you and the men and women that you represent would ever
have to deal with as you serve our country around the world.
We are delighted to have you and of course your witness
statements, without objection, will be entered into the record.
And please feel free to summarize your remarks in about 5
minutes each. And we are very grateful, again, for your service
and would like to, if we could, go ahead and start with you,
Sergeant Major Chandler. Thank you very much.
Opening Statement of Sergeant Major Chandler
Sergeant Major Chandler. Thank you too, sir.
Chairman Culberson, Ranking Member Bishop, distinguished
members of the committee, thank you for your invitation to
represent the more than 2.2 million people that make up your
Army; our soldiers, their family members, and our Department of
the Army civilians.
This subcommittee has a tremendous responsibility ensuring
we have the infrastructure to support our soldiers today and
into the foreseeable future. We truly appreciate all the recent
support you have shown into the Army, especially the funding
for construction of military hospitals, child development
centers, barracks, and family housing since 9/11.
I would also like to welcome all new committee members. I
truly appreciate you taking on the tremendous responsibility of
supporting our soldiers who are dedicated to defending our
nation.
Over the past 11 years, our Army has been fully committed
to combat operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other locations
around the globe.
Secretary McHugh, General Odierno, and I are proud of all
that our Army has accomplished during this period. We have
proven ourselves in every engagement and continue to display
the physical and mental toughness long associated with the word
``soldier.''
General Odierno has highlighted three principal and
interconnected roles for the Army as part of Joint Force 2020.
First, the Army must prevent conflict by maintaining
credibility to avert miscalculations by potential adversaries.
Second, the Army must shape the environment by sustaining
strong relationships with other armies, building their capacity
and facilitating strategic access.
And finally, if prevention fails, the Army must rapidly
apply its capabilities to dominate the environment and win
decisively.
Even though we are an Army in transition, our mission has
not changed, which is to fight and defend and win our nation's
wars. In today's uncertain and complex environment, we are
committed to ensure the Army is the best manned, equipped,
trained, and led force in the world.
However, limited resources have had an impact on our
ability to do this. Our strategy to defend the nation and its
necessary actions requires the Army to have flexibility and
predictability, something we do not currently have and that
Army leadership are challenged to alter.
The fiscal outlook which the Army faces today is
challenging and to my recollection, unprecedented. Fiscal
uncertainties do not allow us to prevent, shape, and win.
The Army has been in the state of continuous war for the
longest time in our nation's history and today we have a more
than 81,000 soldiers committed to operations around the world
with approximately 58,000 serving in Afghanistan.
Nearly 1.5 million soldiers have deployed. More than half a
million have deployed with up to six deployments over the past
11 years. As a matter of fact, I just met a young man yesterday
who was starting his seventh deployment in just a few weeks.
The magnitude of today's fiscal uncertainty have grave
consequences for our soldiers, civilians, and families. We
cannot put the burden of these cuts on their shoulders. The
current continuing resolutions affecting shortfalls for our
funding of overseas contingency operations due to emerging
costs in theater.
With the enactment of sequestration, the Army is also being
forced to make dramatic cuts to personnel, readiness, and
modernization programs thereby putting our national security at
risk.
Army leaders are proud of the contributions of our
soldiers, but many have hidden and invisible wounds. Your
support has allowed us to address issues such as post-traumatic
stress, traumatic brain injury, and wounded warrior care.
That support is greatly appreciated. Your continued support
will help us continue deliver the best care possible for our
young men and women.
We have launched the Army profession campaign to ensure
that every soldier understands how their competence,
commitment, and character underpin the public's trust with the
American soldier.
Examples of that professionalism include the nonevent which
was the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell and the expansion of
career opportunities for female soldiers in combat arms.
For the past 2 years, the Army chose to significantly
reduce our military construction requests as decisions were
being made about our drawdown and force structure determined by
the total Army analysis.
This year, we will complete that assessment, but all new
military construction had been limited by the continuing
resolution. I request your understanding and support when we
seek to continue modernizing our force and its facilities.
This will support our soldiers and their families by
renovating and replacing aging facilities and investing in
infrastructure to ensure our ability to continue meeting the
needs of the nation is fulfilled.
Chairman, as you previously mentioned, and also Ranking
Member Bishop, this week marks the 10th anniversary of the Iraq
war. I would especially like to recognize our Army's 2,574
hostile casualties, our 21,947 soldiers wounded in action, and
the more than 8,700 awards presented to soldiers for valor in
Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation New Dawn.
Since 9/11, more than 4,800 soldiers have given their last
full measure in combat zones around the world. Collectively,
this is a commitment to the nation we cannot deny.
In closing, I want to recognize the amazing work being done
every day by the Army team. As the Sergeant Major of the Army,
the best part of my job is visiting our soldiers' families and
civilians around the world.
They are truly amazing people who are committed to whet
their craft, their profession, and they continue to demonstrate
that each and every day even in the impacts of very strenuous
and difficult times.
I appreciate this opportunity to speak before you and tell
our story and welcome your questions.
Thank you. And Army Strong.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Culberson. Thank you very much, Sergeant Major.
Sergeant Major Barrett, before we begin with your
testimony, if I could, sir, I wanted to recognize our
distinguished ranking member of the full committee; delighted
to have her here with us on the subcommittee. At this time, I
would like to recognize Mrs. Lowey.
Mrs. Lowey Opening Statement
Mrs. Lowey. I would like to thank Chairman Culberson and
Ranking Member Bishop, and I thank you for your friendship and
your warm welcome. It is a pleasure for me to be here today.
I also wanted to extend my good wishes. I understand that--
is this causing trouble?
Loud and clear. I understand the representative of the Navy
couldn't be with us, and I certainly extend our good wishes and
hope for a speedy recovery.
I want to express my appreciation for your service to our
country and I extend you a very warm welcome, our distinguished
military witnesses.
In recent months, leaders in Congress on both sides of the
aisle have discussed the consequences of sequestration. And
beginning April 15th, 768,000 civilians working at the
Department of Defense will begin to be furloughed, which will
have a direct impact on military quality of life by reducing
services in family support centers, day care centers,
deployment readiness centers, family medical services,
counseling services for sexual assault victims, and suicide
prevention.
Furthermore, 139 DOD schools have facilities with an
overall condition rating of either poor or failing, and the
quite significant recapitalization efforts to eliminate space
shortfalls in temporary facilities. I was just shocked by those
numbers.
Sequestration's $523 million reduction to the defense-wide
account will only exacerbate this problem. I am particularly
concerned about the disproportionate effect sequestration will
have on our veterans. Transition assistance services are
crucial to help veterans adjust to civilian life and find
employment after separating from service.
It is imperative to support these programs to uphold.
It is imperative to support these programs to uphold our
promise to those who have served our country so bravely. I am
also concerned that reductions in funding for mental health
services for active duty military personnel will have
devastating and long-lasting impacts. PTSD, depression,
suicide, are just too common among our service members.
Sequestration threatens our ability to care for the mental
wellness of military personnel. We cannot turn our backs on
those who are serving our country. And that is one of the many
reasons why Congress should avoid full implementation of
sequestration by passing a balanced plan that closes tax
loopholes, trims entitlements, and slows future growth of
spending.
And I just want to make one other point because when you
hear the morning news, you hear the up-to-date statistics and
the one even, though it is not your program, I know you care,
it is the veterans affairs, VA, the backlog of veterans' claims
is outrageous. And if we don't all do something about it, shame
on us.
And I know that you care about transition services, and I
know you worry about those who are trying to transition into a
life back home. And I do hope you will work with us to deal
with all these issues that are so very critical.
So thank you so much.
And thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Culberson. Thank you very much, Mrs. Lowey.
As you know, this is the one subcommittee--we really work
arm in arm in support of you and it is a real privilege for all
of us to be here to help you.
Sergeant Major Barrett, we look forward to hearing from
you, sir. Thank you.
Opening Statement of Sergeant Major Barrett
Sergeant Major Barrett. Thank you, sir.
Chairman Culberson, Ranking Member Bishop, and
distinguished members of the subcommittee, in the early hours
of this morning, our nation lost seven Marines, and I ask you
to keep their families and all the men and women who serve our
country in your thoughts and prayers.
Today as we discuss important quality-of-life issues, there
are covert enemies searching for windows of vulnerability to
exploit our liberties and security.
Additionally, the unknown short-and long-term impacts of
the continuing resolution and sequestration add risks to those
who wear the cloth of this nation and causes unnecessary stress
and strain to the people who love them most, our families.
Despite these challenges, your Marines continue to live
hard, train hard, and fight hard, providing our nation the
capability to contain the crisis, fill the gap, and hold the
line.
The quality-of-life needs we hold dear and rely on relieves
us and our loved ones of that unnecessary strain and stress,
allowing us to focus on and to always be leaning forward and
ready to respond whenever the nation calls and wherever the
president may direct.
This past decade serves as a perfect example. Humanitarian
assistance and disaster relief, nine combat and evacuation
operations, supporting and reinforcing embassies around the
globe, regional and theater security cooperation missions,
counterpiracy operations, the tactical recovery of a downed
American aviator, and counterinsurgency operations on more than
one front.
So many have given so much. And your continued fidelity,
our Congress, has provided us with our nations scarcest
resources. General Amos and I, we are forever grateful.
America's treasure doesn't know when or where they will be
called next, but know that your Marines are ready to leave
tonight.
Today, just like the past decade, we are forward deployed,
we are forward engaged, shaping, training, deterring, and
responding to all manner of crisis and contingencies.
Thank you for the opportunity to sit before this
subcommittee.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Culberson. Thank you very much, Sergeant Major Barrett.
Chief Master Sergeant Cody, we are delighted to have you
here and recognize you for your statement, but I would be
remiss if I didn't first recognize the presence of your wife,
Mrs. Cody.
We know who the most important member of the family is. And
we are grateful to you, Mrs. Cody, your family, your sacrifice.
All of the men and women in uniform, I know--but for their
spouses, but for their families, they could not do what they
do, and we are very proud of your husband and grateful to have
you here as well, ma'am.
Chief Master Sergeant, please to recognize you, sir, for
your statement to the committee. Thank you.
Opening statement of Chief Master Sergeant Cody
CMSAF Sergeant Cody. Thank you, Chairman Culberson, Ranking
Member Bishop, and distinguished members of the subcommittee,
thank you for your continued interest in the quality of life of
our military.
It is my distinct honor to join my fellow senior enlisted
advisers in representing the men and women who serve our great
Nation. I sincerely thank you for the opportunity to represent
America's Airmen today.
As you mentioned, I assumed duties as the Chief Master
Sergeant of the Air Force this past January. And yes, I am
accompanied by the better half of the Cody duo, Athena.
For us, this amazing honor is all about our Airmen and
their families who serve and the mission we accomplish for our
great Nation.
As the Air Force's senior enlisted leader I intend to focus
my efforts in three specific areas; deliberate development of
our Airmen, caring for Airmen and their families, and
establishing and maintaining a healthy work/life balance.
Deliberate development of Airmen is an absolute imperative
if we are to ensure the force remains prepared to meet current
requirements and the challenges we will undoubtedly face in the
future.
Investment in education, training, and experiences of
airmen is essential to meeting the demands of the combatant
commanders they serve around the world. The success of your Air
Force is clearly attributed to how well these Airmen are
prepared to handle the tasks those commanders need them to
execute daily.
We will continue to assess what commanders require of joint
force warrior Airmen, ensuring we have the plans and policies
in place to meet future expectations.
Caring for Airmen and their families is all about
maintaining the source of air power. Our Airmen are the engine
that keeps the force moving. And we rely on them to meet any
challenge and overcome any obstacle. We must make sure we
continue to give them the resources to meet these demands.
The hallmark of our success has always been and will remain
our people. The collective impact of over a decade at war with
continued reductions in force size and increasing demands for
our Airmen and air power has clearly stressed the force.
I am particularly concerned with the suicide rates, failed
relationships, domestic violence, financial hardships, and
unprofessional relationships that in some cases have led to
sexual assaults.
As we move forward and our force changes, we must adapt
programs and services to ensure we meet the needs of today's
Airmen and their families.
Directly connected to caring for our Airmen and their
families is establishing and maintaining a sustainable work/
life balance which is critical to keeping Airmen and their
families resilient.
Resilient Airmen and families are capable of handling the
many stresses that come with military life. We ask a great deal
of Airmen. In addition to primary duties, Airmen must execute
additional duties, stay fit, be up to date with their
professional military education, and volunteer in their
communities.
To strike an appropriate balance, we will continue to
examine exactly what we are expecting Airmen to do and advocate
a healthy mix of work time and downtime. We will respect
Airmen's time by eliminating unnecessary additional duties and
employing technology wherever possible to minimize temporary
duty away from home.
We will stay committed to fostering healthy, safe, and
productive work environments where innovation is encouraged. We
will also continue our efforts to ensure family members who
enable our Airmen's success are well cared for.
Much has transpired in the 2.5 weeks since I submitted my
written testimony. There is no question our Airmen are nervous
and concerned with the current fiscal environment and the
effects that this is having on our Nation and Air Force.
The impacts of sequestration and the past 6 months of
operating under continuing resolution authority are significant
and detrimental to our Air Force and for all those serving.
Our Airmen remain dedicated and committed to completing the
mission around the world and ask for your leadership to ensure
they are able to do so.
We thank this committee for its continued support which is
vital to our success. We rely on your efforts, actions, and
legislation to protect our service members and veterans pay and
benefits.
We also appreciate the visits House members have made to
support our Airmen in the field and our wounded warriors in
healthcare facilities.
Thank you again for your continued support of our brave
airmen and their supportive families. I look forward to the
opportunity to answer your questions.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Culberson. Thank you, Chief Master Sergeant.
We are in the first of three votes. I believe there are
probably 3 minutes left approximately. I think the best thing
for us to do would be to recess. We will head up and vote, and
as soon as that last vote starts, members, if you can vote and
return, we will proceed with the questioning at that point.
So if you would excuse us, gentlemen, committee will stand
recessed.
[Recess.]
Mr. Culberson. Thank you very much. The committee will come
to order. We are finishing up votes upstairs. The members will
come in as they finish voting.
We have heard your testimony, which of course will be
entered into the record and deeply appreciate it. And one of my
favorite parts of this hearing is the opportunity to ask you
directly because you are so knowledgeable and have such
terrific personal experience in the quality of life of our men
and women in uniform, I would actually like to ask each one of
you an open-ended question about in your personal opinions,
what are the top three quality-of-life concerns for the
enlisted personnel in your service branch?
And if you could, talk to us about what you would like this
committee to be sure that we remember on your behalf, on behalf
of the men and women that you represent, that you would like to
see us take care of in this year's military construction bill,
remembering that we--I understand the Senate is indeed about to
pass the appropriations bill.
They are going to get that wrapped up, thank goodness. We
have got a MILCON bill in there and a DOD bill, CJS, homeland,
and agriculture. So we are going to take care of the CR at
least for now, so that is going to be some additional load off
your minds.
But talk to us if you could in general about your top three
quality-of-life concerns.
And Sergeant Major Chandler, I would be happy to begin with
you, sir. Thank you.
QUALITY OF LIFE CONCERNS
Sergeant Major Chandler. Thank you, Chairman.
You know, the question that you ask is actually a difficult
one because each one of our programs, quality-of-life programs
that we have in the Army, impacts people in different ways.
So I will give you an example. There may be a young service
member who is moving from Fort Belvoir to Fort Hood and they
may just be starting off in their life and they may not have a
lot of pots and pans.
So in our Army, in our Army community services, we have a
loan closet that provides that for them, and that may be very,
very important to them at that time in their life.
A more senior NCO may be interested in child care and
access to child development centers and how long they may have
to wait or make adjustments in their life, and that may be
important.
We think that within the Army we are actually doing pretty
well with what our programs have been up until this point and
are generally satisfied with our funding levels prior to where
we are now with the continuing resolution and the
sequestration.
So speaking on soldiers' behalf, I think the most important
thing is we need predictability that the programs that the Army
has in place are available and accessible wherever they go.
Without that type of flexibility, the young man may not be
able to have the pots and pans, and he may have to go and
unfortunately maybe get a loan or something from Army emergency
relief in order to buy them, when all he needed was a just a
period of time for his home goods to come to be delivered.
And the child development center access may not be
available, and if we have it, then that sergeant first class
knows when he goes to work his family is going to be taking
care of.
So for us, as an Army perspective, we really need that
budget that we are hoping that gets passed here momentarily and
provides us some relief to be flexible and agile within the
Army to be able to deliver the services.
We think we are in good shape if we can get the flexibility
and the resources that the budget has asked for.
Mr. Culberson. Thank you, sir.
Sergeant Major Barrett.
Sergeant Major Barrett. Thank you, sir.
And again, just like Sergeant Major Chandler said, it
depends on who you ask and where you are when you ask the
question, because it is not like the three of us hadn't
traveled around the country and visited our forces and asked
the very question we knew you were going to ask us today.
And I would start off by telling you that God bless our
Marine martial spirit and the genuine concern for their
families that they have, because the three things that came up
most common as I traveled the service and traveled the force,
was they wanted to know how our readiness was going to be
impacted.
The second thing that was the most important to them when
you looked at a young family or you looked at a young female
Marine and she is standing there and she is 7 months pregnant
and the very first thing out of her mouth was, ``How is this
going to impact family programs?''
And one question that was a common and steady-state
question, no matter where you went or who you talked to, what
rank, age, or gender the person was, they just wanted to know,
``Where and when and who are we fighting next?''
So when you look at the top quality-of-life issues,
speaking on behalf of our Marines, it is those warfighter and
family service programs that have kept us whole over this past
decade of fighting.
CMSAF Cody. Mr. Chairman, it is tough to follow these two,
obviously, because they really have articulated well what I
think all our servicemen and women and their families are
concerned with at this current juncture in our Nation's
situation.
So I have asked those same exact questions, and it is
somewhat encouraging and disheartening at the same time, when
you--you know shortly after assuming this position I traveled
over into the Gulf region with the Chief of Staff, and we spent
time with thousands of our Airmen as well as other service men
and women serving in that area.
IMPACT OF FISCAL SITUATION
And their number one question was the impact of our fiscal
situation back at home and the impacts it would have on them
directly executing the war effort, and then on their families
back home. What would be left?
So it is difficult, all of those things, and I think well
said in the fact that where you sit is where you stand. So any
one of those programs to a given individual is the most
important program that we could advocate for at a given time
depending on your situation.
And again, I think we do appreciate the efforts of this
committee over time to support us on the broader aggregate
sense of those things that we have prioritized as Services to
put the investment into to sustain that commitment to our
Airmen and their families.
But in the immediate, we need a budget and we need
flexibility within that budget to make the decisions to
maintain readiness of the force.
Make no mistake about it, the service men and women who put
this uniform on every day are here to serve and their families
support them in their service. We have to give them the means
to do that.
Mr. Culberson. Thank you, sir.
INADEQUATE HOUSING
Let me ask one question about housing, and then I will pass
to Mr. Bishop. If I could ask each one of you to talk about
inadequate housing--construction--deficit--and then talk to us
a little bit about the----
CMSAF Cody. We have very few Airmen that are living in what
we would consider inadequate housing. We certainly have a
prioritization list within our single dormitory facilities for
our single airmen where we have some, those that must be
upgraded or new construction in place.
A couple of locations overseas that have impact that we
need to get after right away, and they are our immediate
concerns within what we are requesting under MILCON, but we
have actually done fairly well when you consider the efforts in
what privatization of housing has done for our Air Force.
I mean, it has actually been a great effort. It has given
us housing that we would otherwise have been unable to have in
such a short period of time available to our Airmen and their
families. So I think that is a success story.
But, you know, again, it is an incremental investment plan
that we have, pick the location and how we are prioritizing
where we will invest or where it is best to divest and look for
other options for our Airmen.
Mr. Culberson. When do you expect the Air Force to
eliminate the deficit of adequate housing and finish building
out?
CMSAF Cody. The Air Force currently meets OSD's goal for
adequate military housing and expects to continue meeting that
goal through investment in government owned homes and execution
of housing privatization.
MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING
Sergeant Major Barrett. Well, sir, 75 percent of our
families live off-base. We have 24,000 homes worldwide, 99
percent of our housing is the public-private venture. We
couldn't be happier with the services that they provide us.
They are absolutely wonderful people.
They don't leave our families waiting to have any services
done when things go wrong. And I can't give you the exact
number of inadequate housing that we have and I have been to
every single base, station, installation across the United
States and overseas, and----
Mr. Culberson. Do any stand out in your mind, that you
recall?
Sergeant Major Barrett. No, sir.
Mr. Culberson. I know we got the BEQs----
Sergeant Major Barrett. Yes, sir. Yes, sir, and you know, I
think BEQs is a different question, so I didn't know if you
wanted us to elaborate----
Mr. Culberson. How is that going? We fully funded that for
you in previously years' bills----
Sergeant Major Barrett. Sir, BEQs are going up exactly as
planned. And even with our planned drawdown to the eventually
182,100, we will just be under 100 percent for putting heads to
beds in the United States Marine Corps.
But to use a phrase that I used last year and I heard it
again this year as I traveled around, the newest of all of the
BEQs that our Marines are living in, they don't even call them
barracks anymore. They call it their community because of just
how wonderful they are and all the additional resources that is
provided to them.
Mr. Culberson. Thank you, sir.
Sergeant Major Barrett. Yes, sir.
Mr. Culberson. Sergeant Major Chandler.
HOUSING
Major Chandler. Sir, I appreciate the question. We have had
a--I think a categorical success with our Residential
Communities Initiative in providing quality homes for our
soldiers around the United States.
It is amazing when you see where we have come since the
mid-1990s of when Congress enacted the Residential Communities
Initiative, amazing success story.
We have very, very few people, families that are in
substandard housing. And what a lot of our partners are doing
is either not charging the full BAH for those that are not
renovated fully, you know, fully satisfactory. And we also have
a build-out plan to either demolish, renovate, and replace
those homes that are less than what they offer for new
construction. So we are doing really well there.
I would tell you, though, that sequestration does have an
impact on us in our housing services office, which are the
staff that support helping soldiers to find facilities off
post, and that is a challenge for us.
You know that there may be some predatory practices with
off-post lodging accommodations and making sure we have good
quality of life, so that is a concern for the Army.
As far as our barracks, our single soldier quarters, again,
we have had tremendous help from you and this committee over
the years we have done an amazing job with barracks.
I am sure all of us when we lived in the barracks, I was--I
lived three to a room and it was a two-man room, and we liked
it. Now we have set the standard that is awesome. It is really
amazing what we have provided.
We do have challenges for a sustainment, restoration, and
modernization, however. And as sequestration has had a huge
impact in those abilities and so what we are only going to do
for the Army is, is to take care of life, health, and safety
issues. So maintaining the new facilities is going to be at
risk for a period of time until we can get through this.
So we have invested billions of dollars on new facilities
and we are at the place now that if something happens, we can
only take care of life, health, and safety, and we will defer a
lot of that maintenance until we can move through this
challenging time fiscally, and that is a challenge for us.
SINGLE ENLISTED QUARTERS CONSIDERATIONS
Mr. Culberson. And you are in the process of segregating on
the single--or the barracks for the single members, men in one
and women in the other----
Sergeant Major Chandler. No, sir. They don't share a room
together, but we have----
[Laughter.]
For obvious reasons--they don't--anyways.
Mr. Culberson. That is kind of a big deal, what are you
going to do?
Sergeant Major Barrett. What we do now----
Mr. Culberson. Living quarters, that is a real problem.
Sergeant Major Barrett. What we will----
Mr. Culberson. We are short of money.
Sergeant Major Barrett. Yes, sir. What we will do now is
the same thing we have been doing. So we have a facilities
manager, in this case a noncommissioned officer, within each
one of the brigades that assigns quarters barracks to our
single soldiers.
And what happens is when a young man or woman enters into
the unit, they will be assigned a space. If they are female
soldiers, we generally pair females with females. We may
provide a single room for a female if there's no other females
in the facility.
We also do things like smokers. You know, we look at
whether or not people are smokers or not and try to accommodate
non-smokers with non-smokers and smokers with smokers.
So we have a system in place----
Mr. Culberson [continuing]. And all our soldiers behave
appropriately.
Sergeant Major Chandler. But we also monitor that. So in
the Army we called them charge of quarters, and their
responsibility is to check on and monitor standards and
discipline within the barracks and to report, you know, things
that are not the way they are supposed to be.
We have a very effective program with that. We think we do
pretty well.
Mr. Culberson [continuing]. Mr. Bishop.
Mr. Bishop. Thank you very much. I am going to turn my
attention to--I am going to put on my hat as the co-chair of
the Military Family Caucus.
Service members, we all know, will not see a reduction in
income as a result of the sequester and--military personnel
accounts are exempt from sequestration but many of the families
rely on, as you alluded, to quality-of-life benefits.
For example, the readiness center, sexual assault
prevention, response programs, suicide prevention programs,
substance abuse education centers, and the teachers at the DOD
schools both domestically and abroad will be subject to the
civilian furloughs.
So starting with the Army and going to each of you, you
indicated, each of you, that you talked with your service
members and they expressed concerns about it, but my questions
to you is do you expect major disruptions in these programs as
a result of the furloughs caused by sequestration?
MAJOR DISRUPTIONS
Sergeant Major Chandler. Yes, sir. From the Army
perspective, we do believe that we are going to have
disruptions.
And I will give you a very easy example. So I am currently
being treated for mild traumatic brain injury. I go to Fort
Belvoir. Speaking with my doctor, who's the head of the clinic,
now they have lost personnel who were contract employees that
helped in speech therapy and occupational therapy and so on.
And when I asked him, ``Well why? What is the problem?'' He
said they are concerned about their ability to stay on board as
contract employees, and they are looking for another
opportunity that is going to provided them predictability.
So what does that mean? That means the access to care and
appointments are going to be impacted. They already are being
impacted.
We are going to look at a series of ways within the Army
with furloughs where some places may close up for an entire
day. Some places will have reduced manning across the entire
week.
FURLOUGH IMPACTS
Any one of those circumstances is going to hinder the
delivery of services in a way that we have envisioned and have
provided over the past several years.
So it is going to have an impact on our Army, and it is
going to impact the quality of life.
Second and third order of effect. You know, if you are
going to close a child development center for a day a week, for
instance, and you have a dual-military couple, what are you
going to do?
Well, the command is more than likely going to look to take
care of that soldier or soldiers, and say, ``Okay, look, we are
going to let you not be at work today because of the
circumstances for the Army.'' Well, that is a loss of
productivity.
So that--it all impacts in one way or another. You may not
see it directly in your face, but it can be very insidious and
impact across the entire Army and its radius.
Mr. Bishop. Sergeant Barrett? Sergeant Major Barrett,
excuse me.
Sergeant Major Barrett. Not a problem, sir. It is still a
compliment. It is still a compliment. If you would have called
me Mr. or something, then I would have taken offense because
you would not have recognized me as someone who served this
nation differently. So it is still a compliment, sir.
Wonderful NCOs in all of the branches of the service.
Mr. Bishop. Hoowah.
Sergeant Major Barrett. Exactly what Sergeant Major
Chandler said. And there is one other thing I--you know, I
wrote down a couple notes as he was talking to jog my memory.
Any actions that impact our civilian Marines will directly
impact our capability to provide essential support services to
Marines and families. And I wrote down behaviorialists, for
those wonderful people who take care of children that have some
type of autism spectrum disorder or ADD or something of that
sort, that is just less care. That is less people who are
trained to help raise our families is impacted.
So I add to Sergeant Major Chandler's perfect comments.
Mr. Bishop. Chief?
CMSAF Cody. Thank you. Again, difficult to follow the
Sergeant Majors, but I will echo that I think we have to be
very concerned with what--I am not sure that there are going to
be--you know, it will not be an uninformed consequence of these
actions. I mean we are talking about them, so I think we are
informed about them.
The fact is, is we will take a large percentage of our
civilian workforce, civilian Airmen, out of play for the Air
Force to the tune of approximately 180,000. That will impact
our ability to do what our Nation needs us to do. It will
impact every single Airman and their family.
Pick the location and how that organization has been
structured, it could be draconian. Others, maybe not so much,
so it is difficult to say. And that is the greater concern is
we just don't know in some areas. But I know our Service Chiefs
have been very clear in the preceding months to sequestration
and through that we are very concerned with this.
I am very concerned with the mental health provider
availability when Airmen are going to be in need of assistance
and that may not be available.
Mr. Bishop. I have one follow up. The reports on
sequestration have alluded to the high percentage of military
spouses who are also civilian employees of the federal
government or they are employees of DOD contractors.
Again, the military personnel accounts are exempt, but the
families who have federal employees as spouses will see their
incomes reduced in all likelihood.
SPOUSES FURLOUGHED UNDER SEQUESTER
So starting with the Army, can you estimate how many
families in your respective services will have spouses who will
be likely furloughed under the sequester?
Sergeant Major Chandler. Sir, we are challenged with the
contractor piece. It is hard for us to know how many of our
family members are employed by contractors.
All appropriated fund civilian employees of the Army, with very
limited exceptions (deployed Civilians in a combat zone; non-
appropriated fund employees; OCONUS foreign national employees; etc)
are expected to be furloughed for no more than 22 non-consecutive work
days beginning no earlier than 1 April 2013 and ending prior to 30
September 2013. The Army can only track hiring information of family
members or Army spouses if they are hired under a family member
appointment or spouse appointment. To date, we have approximately 4,000
employees that are in these categories. Please note that this is not
reflective of all spouses or family members that could be employed by
the Department of Army under a different appointing authority.
From a federal government employee perspective, we believe
that number is somewhere around 40,000. We are not as well
defined on that as we probably ought to be, and I can take that
question for the record and get you a detailed number.
Through March 2013, the DON has hired 1,844 military spouses, 297
of those spouses are veterans. Since the DON utilizes numerous hiring
and appointing authorities to employ individuals, we are unable to
confirm how many military spouses we employ. The DON is making every
effort to minimize and mitigate the impact of the required budget
reductions, the majority of which resulted from the triggering of
sequestration on 1 March 2013. These reductions adversely affect
programs across the enterprise.
Mr. Bishop. Thank you. That would be helpful.
Sergeant Major Barrett. Sir, same. I could not give you the
exact number, but I can tell you that we have 93,000 married
Marines running around the Marine Corps today. And I know a
great number of them are employed, but I could not give you an
exact number how many are employed federally versus those who
have particular jobs out in the 'ville or on bases. So I will
take that as a matter of record as well, sir.
If furlough occurs, employed military spouses will experience one
day per week across 14 weeks in a furlough status, suffering a 20%
reduction in their pay during that time, along with others in our
civilian workforce who work in positions not excepted under the
furlough. As of 28 February 2013, the Marine Corps has 1,678 civil
servants who are also dependents of military personnel.
CMSAF Cody. Sir, as well, I will have to find out the exact
number of how many that we have that will be impacted those
that are serving with the federal employee spouses.
Currently, there are 13,070 AF military spouses who are AF civilian
employees of the federal government working in various positions world-
wide and the majority will be affected by the furlough as very few
positions are excepted.
We are deeply concerned about the potential impact of furlough on
our military families. Many of our military spouses are federal
employees, whom not only are providing a valued service on behalf the
nation, but are contributing to the family budget. As there may be
financial hardships imposed on our military families, we are postured
to have resources available to mitigate the difficulties due to loss of
income. Our Airmen and their families will have access to Airmen &
Family Readiness Centers and Military One Source, both providing
accredited financial counselors to assist with financial budgeting,
credit management or crisis referrals. Also, the Air Force Aid Society
is available to provide short-term interest free loans or grants to
assist as needed.
Mr. Bishop. But you do have a substantial number of spouses
who work for the federal government in civilian employment?
CMSAF Cody. Absolutely.
Mr. Bishop. So if they are furloughed, that obviously will
impact the family's income.
Sergeant Cody. Yes, sir.
Mr. Bishop. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Culberson. Thank you very much.
I am going to recognize the congressman representing Fort
Hood, Judge John Carter.
Mr. Carter. My pleasure, Mr. Chairman.
Welcome. I haven't missed this subcommittee for 8 years. I
wouldn't miss this particular gathering--thank you for the
things you tell us over the years and the insights you have
into your personal charges and reminding us of things like day
care and medical treatments and all the other issues we have
been able to address.
We are at a difficult place, where our services have
already agreed before we ever started talking about CRs or
sequester to reduce the force. All of our services got together
and agreed to a reduction in force.
So this is multifaceted reduction, what we are dealing
with. The CR kept us stagnant for long periods of time.
I hear the same thing everywhere, every time. And it is
really great that you all three stated the same thing. First
mission is a trained warrior. You all have said that.
We must have trained people in the field to fight our wars.
So we have to ensure training's the most important thing we do.
If we are not able to send the best military on the face of the
earth into the battle, we lose--so we do that. Program suffers
as a consequence. And, you know, we just had the big blow-up--
Ft. Hood on the issue of tuition assistance.
Tuition assistance, a program that is utilized very, very
heavily; 13,500 people are affected--in the Ft. Hood general
area. It is a big deal.
When I talk to the people who are in charge, they say we
want an educated force, but we have got to have a trained force
first. So we have to make those decisions.
Many of you have to make those decisions with commanding
officers, and I thank you for being willing to make them.
I think there is some good news on the horizon, and I think
we are making this perfectly clear. I believe that our DOD and
our MILCON bill will both be appropriations bills.
Those bills do give you that flexibility that you do not
have under a CR to make program changes. And I think that is
the key of why the chairman on the House side launched this
idea of passing certain appropriations bills coupled with the
CR.
The fact that you will be able to move money around to meet
those needs, that sequester was a bad idea, but we got it.
So what about the flexibility? Make the assumption, as I
am, we are going to get at least two appropriation bills
providing flexibility--between programs. How important is that?
BUDGET FLEXIBILITY
Sergeant Major Chandler. Yes, sir. Flexibility obviously is
one of the things that we need in the Army. Obviously, we would
like a budget. That is the best deal.
If we don't get that for whatever reason and we have some
more additional flexibility through another continuing
resolution, that will help the Army, as I am sure will the rest
of the services.
So it will allow us to do things to reassess our priorities
list and provide the resources that we can move from one
account to the other to be able to fully source of those that
need it the most. And readiness is our most important concern
in the Army.
As the chief has testified recently that, you know, right
now, where we are at, we are only going to be able to provide
for those who are currently deployed and the next set of
deployers. And that is a big concern for the Army.
You know, for our other nondeploying units that still need
to maintain readiness, we are not going to be able to provide
anything other than the lowest level of individual and
collective small unit--and I am talking anywhere from one
person to maybe 40--of training and--and frankly that is not a
level of readiness that we are comfortable with. As a matter of
fact, we are uncomfortable with it.
And so, that forces the chief and the secretary to make
very difficult decisions, as you have articulated.
So, yes, the CR is going to help us or the budget obviously
will make the best of a bad situation for everybody.
IMPORTANCE OF APPROPRIATIONS BILL
Sergeant Major Barrett. Allowing us to move money around in
the programs is all we have ever wanted. And I heard that come
out of the hallways not too long ago. Because when you sit back
and look at it, and sir, you talked about it, it is all about
mission accomplished--you know, mission first, but it is people
always.
And when you look at the five pillars of institutional
readiness, high-quality people, and that is finding them,
recruiting them, and retaining them, and then it is unit
readiness and not just in the short-term unit readiness. We
need to have long-term unit readiness so that we can pick up
and move if we have to move. If someone threatens our
liberties, we are able to go in there and put a boot in their
neck.
And then you have got the equipment modernization. Then we
are talking about infrastructure sustainment. And Sergeant
Major Chandler mentioned it earlier when he was talking about
barracks and housing, and he was talking about facilities
sustainment, restoration, and modernization. Those things are
all dollars.
We know where we need to put our money. We know what is the
priority. Give that to our service chief to make those
decisions, and that is all we have really ever wanted.
And then obviously the fifth most--and one of the most
important elements of the pillars of readiness is providing
capability and capacity to those geographical combatant
commanders when they need us to do all those important missions
around the globe, whether it is helping people or just running
some type of regional or theater security cooperation mission
to partner up with a friend somewhere else. So that is how we
feel about it, sir.
CMSAF Cody. Thank you. I think, again, flexibility is
essential, and it is--really, every day that we don't have it,
it makes it even more difficult whatever flexibility we do
receive with an appropriation or some type of budget that we
can operate in.
The challenge that we are faced with in this, though, is we
are half way through this fiscal year, and the decisions we
will have to make to maintain readiness, to continue to
accomplish the mission that we are asked to do, will not be
popular with everybody.
And that is probably a greater challenge for us, trying to
convince everybody why the people that you have put in charge
to run your militaries that I would hope you have faith in will
do the best by the nation that they can, allow them to do that.
Because every time we come forward and say, ``This is what
we need to do,'' but that doesn't align with something, it
creates a second- and third-order affect for us that is
untenable at times.
Mr. Carter. That is a very good statement. And I appreciate
that. I appreciate what you have to say.
Those of us who are appropriators in the House, we have
done an appropriations bill for every subject that we have to
deal with. Every year we pass an appropriation bill that is
looking at your needs--the needs, based upon the money we have
at the time. We have written a bill that funds our military.
Then we go--to the other side of this building, and we are
stuck with a C.R., which hurts because we are not adjusting to
the year we are dealing with. You are going back to the
previous year, and then the previous year before that.
That is why I say, passing an appropriations bill rather
than a C.R. as it relates to the military I think is going to
be a much appreciated, but the sequester is still going to be
there. But at least you will be dealing with the the issue in
the House of Representatives, but this will be a good move for
your services at this present time. And that should be, I
think, a better way to move forward, not perfect, but not as
bad as it could have been.
Thank you for what you do. You are the backbone of our
national defense, and we appreciate you.
Mr. Culberson. Thank you, Judge.
Mr. Farr.
Mr. Farr. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
And thank you, gentlemen, for your service, and thank you
for coming today.
I am really sorry to hear about the Marines that were lost
in the depot accident, and thinking about their families and
about the shock of getting that news.
You know, you are here under stressful fiscal times. And to
me, it is a tragedy that we as a professional Congress have put
you in that situation. I really want to apologize. I think our
institution has failed your institution.
Sequestration is only a decision, and it was a decision
that Congress made. They didn't have to make it. There are ways
of balancing budgets.
I have been in elective office for 38 years, and I have
done budgets at the local level, budgets for the nation-state
of California, which is, next to the federal budget, probably
the biggest budget in the United States. We have never done
budgets without revenues.
And we have that ability. But we have let this nation down,
this institution, and now, we are talking about disaster
recovery, how are we going to deal with cuts that go back to
2012 and in some instances beyond that.
And then this whole idea of sequestration and furloughs, it
wasn't necessary. Sequestration, budgets are only a decision.
And we decided to make the wrong decision, and now we are
trying to work our way out of it.
And, yes, as long as it is the law, we have to stick with
it. And I hope I am here to see if we can change that law.
The thing that really strikes me is the stress that we have
put on this nation, being at war for a record number of years.
The cost of that war fiscally has really been stressful for our
country. The cost to the men and women in uniform and service
to their families has been shocking.
SUICIDE PREVENTION
And one of the things that is most shocking is suicide
rates. Suicide now in the military is the highest it has ever
been. It does not appear that combat experience or post-
traumatic stress disorder is related necessarily to the
suicide. A recent report on the suicides in the National Guard,
which has the highest rate of all Army branches--[Phone
rings.]--that is my daughter. She wants some money. [Laughter.]
But they found that there was no conclusive correlation
between active service and suicides. And 90 percent of the
cases in the National Guard study were taking place while they
were on civilian status, which is to say outside the military
atmosphere. We know that these suicides--this sort of gets into
a tricky issue that we are talking about--guns were involved in
61 percent of the suicides in the military. Of that 61 percent,
three out of four personnel, were personal firearms.
It would seem to me the ability to identify at-risk service
members and then to remove the ability of suicide--in this
case, the firearm--is a critical step.
Absent a national authorization for any kind of registry,
which I don't think we are going to get, in the military what
steps can the services take to implement such a requirement to
mitigate suicides, which are clearly such an epidemic? Do you
have any thoughts about that?
Sergeant Major Barrett. Sir, are you talking specifically
about gun control specifically?
Mr. Farr. Well, personal weapons that service members have
who may be service members at risk.
Sergeant Major Barrett. Short of taking guns out of
everyone's hands, sir--first of all----
Mr. Farr. But we are not talking about everyone. We are
talking about people that are under your----
Sergeant Major Barrett. At risk.
Mr. Farr [continuing]. Are under either your command or
your personnel. Do you discuss these issues?
Sergeant Major Barrett. Sir, for example, in the United
States Marine Corps, one of the things we have is we have force
preservation councils corps-wide. And it provides the
commanders an opportunity to determine and scale every single
one of the Marines to determine who is at risk and who is not
at risk, and then to put certain measures in place to mitigate
or prevent something bad from happening.
And, you know, leadership is absolutely--engaged.
Leadership is at the front of stopping some of these terrible
things that are happening inside of our ranks.
You know, suicide is not the only thing happening inside of
our ranks. There are many societal issues, societal plagues, if
you will, that are inside the ranks. And it doesn't matter at
what level. There are drugs, alcohol, domestic violence,
criminal mischief, sexual misconduct, hazing, operational
stress, force preservation deficiencies, and suicide.
We could talk about all of them, but we have put things in
place at every single one of our senior leadership levels, and
all the way down to the battalion level, we have force
preservation councils that determine who is at risk, who is not
at risk, and things that we can do to mitigate anything bad
from happening.
So we rely heavily on our engaged leadership to determine
who is at risk and who is not at risk.
Mr. Farr. Is there any counseling given to service men and
women--we have 61 percent of the deaths caused by their
personal weapons. Is there any counseling given to the presence
of those weapons that could be high risk for that individual?
Sergeant Major Barrett. There is counseling, sir, aboard
all of our installations. And I won't speak for other services,
but, absolutely, so there is counseling available for
everybody----
Mr. Farr. What kind?
Sergeant Major Barrett. Well, we have a behavioral health
integrated network that has integrated combat operational
stress controls, operational stress control and readiness,
suicide, substance abuse, family advocacy programs to better
synchronize our efforts in research, resources, to set policy,
to establish training for prevention and treatment.
So holistically, we have behavioral health programs that
cover down on all those things that are plaguing our service,
sir.
Mr. Farr. This is a big issue in my district, how we do
suicide prevention. And I just thought that we might pursue
private personal weapons, firearms that service members have,
particularly for those who may be at high risk. I think that
some counseling would be necessary.
Let me ask you another question. This one will make you
happy. I represent the Defense Language Institute in
California. And the Marine Corps sends young recruits, you
know, entry-level service personnel to get training and also
bring them back for a refresher and learning second and third
languages, and officers attend the school, as well, but
primarily enlisted.
The Naval Postgraduate School has an FAO program, foreign
officers refresher training course that seems to be very
popular, modeled after the Army that the Navy is now
implementing.
And I wondered, Sergeant Major Barrett, if the Marine Corps
has a language capability that they are implementing at the
unit level. It looks to be very innovative and promising for
the Pacific rebalance and for our national security strategy.
FOREIGN LANGUAGE PROGRAMS
I wondered what your service is doing to replicate what the
other services are doing to replicate a similar ability at the
unit level for your role in building partner capacity in the
Pacific and elsewhere.
Sergeant Major Barrett. Yes, sir. First, I will talk to
exactly what our--we call it our FAS/RAS program, which is
equivalent to the FAO/RAO program for our officers, and what it
does is it provides language and regional expertise and
cultural skill sets to the Marine Air-Ground Task Force.
We presently have been--we are into our 13th month already
with the 27-month beta test. And we just received our first
Marine home who went out as a FAS. He was out with the 24th
MEU. I have read all the after-action reports. And he was
absolutely integral in the identifying and selecting and
educating others on international affairs that covered down on
tactical, operational, strategic-level thinking. He helped to
support joint and combined staffs and other interagency
organizations.
And it was all for the purpose of--in order to support the
Marine Air-Ground Task Force in planning, in operations,
security cooperation, to intelligence efforts, to incorporating
all those language, regional expertise, and cultural skill
sets.
We have one--or three right now who are currently deployed
with the 15th MEU and the 31st MEU. Two have just completed
language, their language training, and are being assigned to
our MARSOC command and to our Marine Corps Security Cooperation
Group. And three just finished regional travel in Africa and
the Middle East.
It is an absolutely wonderful program. They stand shoulder-
to-shoulder right there with our forward area officers and our
regional area officers. And they make a difference.
Mr. Farr. Is the Army and Air Force replicating or
interested in replicating this?
CMSAF Cody. The Air Force has a program we call LEAP. It is
Language Enabled Airman Program, and they enroll through at Air
University. And they get a similar type of training
indoctrination, and then we will pair that with a requirement
in a particular theater down the road. So similar in context.
PILOT LANGUAGE PROGRAM
Sergeant Major Chandler. Sir, we have a program that is a
pilot right now. It is our Foreign Area NCO program. It is
being used in the European Command right now by the United
States Army Europe. We have identified individuals. We have not
provided the language training at this point. We pair them with
the foreign-area officer. And their focus is really on
individual and small-unit training and then noncommissioned
officer development.
That pilot will be concluded by the end of this year. We
will provide that information to the Army G-3 as part of their
FAO program and look at where we need to assess what gaps came
out of this and where we need to expand the program. So initial
reports are, it has been extremely successful for what we
tailored it to do in the first place.
We specifically made the call in the language because we
wanted to get the folks out there really quickly and start to
assess--do a needs analysis, basically; what do we additionally
need to be able to have these folks function at a higher level?
I am assuming the results of that will be out in the fall,
and we will be able to move forward. I am not going to say that
we need language yet, because that is a little bit ahead of the
report, but if we do, I am sure that we will look at where we
are going to be able to deliver that and how we are going to do
that.
Mr. Farr. That would be very interesting.
And this committee has always been interested in this. One
thing we all realize is that if we all are going to have a
smaller military, we have got to have a smarter military. And
one way of getting smart is to learn the languages and cultures
of the world we live in and the world we have to deploy in.
And we know, when we can communicate with the host country
nationals, that you are a heck of a lot better off. So I hope
we move in that direction.
SUICIDE PREVENTION
Sergeant Major Chandler. Sir, if I may, can I follow up on
your question about suicides?
Mr. Farr. Yes, I would appreciate that.
Sergeant Major Chandler. So, within the Army, you know, we
have got more control with individuals that live on-post versus
those that live off-post. And we have the ability to secure
weapons that are personal weapons that someone has that lives
on-post inside of an arms room or another storage facility.
FIREARMS--SUICIDE PREVENTION
Mr. Farr. Okay. What are the rules? Are they allowed to
have their own personal weapons or firearms? Or do they have to
have them locked up? What is the requirement?
Sergeant Major Chandler. Yes, sir. The soldier has to
register their privately owned weapon with the provost marshal.
They have got to maintain specific securities with the weapon.
We highly encourage them, and make the armorer or the person
that is responsible for that facility available if they want to
draw their weapon out.
The challenge, though, really becomes to our off-post
persons and our ability to be able to house their weapon. We
provide that opportunity for them. We highly encourage it, but
we cannot make a soldier put his weapon in the arms room,
unless he has been identified as a high-risk behavior, and then
we can require them to live on-post.
And if we choose to go that route, then we have some
additional authorities that we can use to be able to bring the
weapon into the arms room. And that is kind of where we stand
right now. If we identify somebody as a high-risk soldier, we
are going to counsel them, in line with what their--possibly
from a behavioral health perspective or other issue that is
going on in their life, and then we are going to talk to them
and highly encourage them to get their weapon in the facility.
And we are very committed to that.
You know, we have a lot of challenges with suicides in our
Army, as you well know. We are not satisfied with where we are.
But as Sergeant Major Barrett said, it really starts with
engaged leadership. And at the end of the day, a soldier--if he
is determined to take his life--will find a venue to do that.
Our focus is on preventing that before it happens by
leaders being engaged in their soldiers' lives. And we are
starting to see some success in that area.
LEADER BOOK
One of my focus areas as the sergeant major of the Army is
this thing called a leader book, and it is really a book that a
person will have, a leader will have that would state, hey,
here is what I know about this soldier, and it is an
inspectable item, so their leader can say, ``Tell me about
Chandler.'' ``Well, Chandler is, you know, $5,000 in debt and
his car is on cinderblocks in the yard.'' ``Okay, we got a
problem. We need to take some action. Let's see what is going
on with Chandler's life.''
That engagement may be the difference. And if we focus on
that, then we can get them to the help that they need. And that
is where I think we are doing a better job than we have in the
past. Results will be proof in the pudding. If we start to see
a reduction in high-risk behaviors in our Army, we think that
will be a contributing factor.
Mr. Farr. Well, I hope you are successful. Okay. Okay. The
Air Force?
Mr. Culberson [continuing]. Really important--suicide----
CMSAF Cody. So in the interest of time, Mr. Farr, the Air
Force does have an 11 element program that is widely
recognized, and we are having great success with it, broken
down into three categories. It will be leadership and
community, education, and protection for those under
investigation in, you know, the 11 sub-areas that fall under
those categories.
I can provide that in a written response to you, but we
absolutely deliberately in that leadership involvement piece
either they know if one of our Airmen own a weapon or we
inquire once we think they are at risk and take the appropriate
action to either take it away if they are on installation, like
the sergeant major articulated, or ask them and encourage them
voluntarily to release it to us if they live off installation.
The critical link to taking any action to remove access to
firearms is to first identify those who are at risk, and then
to take appropriate action. Removing an individual's access to
means of self-harm, or ``Means Restriction'', is important when
dealing with those who are distressed. Identifying those at
risk is part of the training received by every Air Force Airman
as part of our annual suicide prevention training. So, really
every Airman is a part of this process. Our mental health
providers are also key players in the identification process
and work directly to advise commanders on the status of the
personnel at risk under their command.
We take to heart the safety of our Airmen and family
members with the understanding that this is a central
obligation of command authority, and is top priority of senior
enlisted members and unit commanders. If a commander has family
advocacy or suicide concerns for an individual, they have
unique authorities to either temporarily, or if necessary
permanently remove access for individuals under their command
to government issued service weapons. In some cases they can
also confiscate personal weapons stored in government owned
facilities. Further, possession of privately owned weapons is
forbidden in the majority of Air Force facilities.
Commanders who have concerns about the well-being of their
members who live off-base or in privatized housing are advised
to seek the advisement of their local judge advocate team on
options to direct the placement of members at risk of suicide
to a safe and secure environment, separating them from weapons
which can be used to harm themselves or others The FY 13 NDAA
also provides commanders and health professionals the authority
to inquire whether a military member plans to acquire, or
already possesses or owns, a privately-owned firearm,
ammunition, or other weapon, if such health professional or
commander has reasonable grounds to believe the military member
is at risk for suicide or causing harm to others. Also,
commanders may refer to local or state laws on the ability for
local law enforcement to collect and secure privately owned
weapons.
Mr. Farr. I am encouraged to know that. And I hope that
under sequestration efforts to prevent suicides aren't
impacted.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Culberson. You bet. Thank you, Mr. Farr.
Critically important issue. I know there will be a number
of written questions, as well, on that subject and also what
you are doing to help identify soldiers, airmen, Marines,
sailors with post-traumatic stress disorder, a deep concern, as
well.
We are moving into this series of votes here, so we will
probably adjourn after this round, submit additional questions
in writing, but I want to recognize my good friend from
Mississippi, Mr. Nunnelee.
Mr. Nunnelee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Can you just briefly describe to me your planning for
sequestration, specifically the 6 months leading up to that--to
sequestration?
And I am also interested to know, given the dollar amount
that we had to implement under your command, do you believe we
made the right decisions in what was cut? Or would you have
preferred to see it cut to achieve the same dollar amount in a
different way?
Sergeant Major Chandler. You want me to go first?
Mr. Nunnelee. That would be fine.
SEQUESTER CUTS--FLEXIBILITY
Sergeant Major Chandler. Okay, sir. To the question about
cuts, if cuts needed to occur, I think that the services should
have had the flexibility, given the requirement to determine
where they needed the cuts, instead of across-the-board cuts,
at least from an Army perspective.
The inflexibility that we continue to keep talking about is
what really ties our hands to be able to make those strategic
choices and mitigate risk.
The planning process, from an Army perspective, from my
perspective, what I saw happen was people trying to do the best
that they could with the information that they had available
and provide informed recommendations to the Army leadership.
And in hindsight, you could make all different kinds of
assumptions about whether that was right or wrong, but I know
what the impact is of what we have now. And that is an Army
service that is in--that is struggling right now to be able to
provide a trained and ready force. And readiness is--as part of
quality of life impacts readiness and our ability to recruit
and retain people in the service, which is what the Army is
about, it is having a huge impact. And we will continue to be
challenged with it until we can get through this. And that is
really the most--the thing I would like to carry away for this
entire committee.
SEQUESTRATION PLANNING
Until we can get through this, we are going to--it is going
to continue to snowball and our ability to recover from where
we are, even right now, just a few weeks into sequestration,
sir.
Sergeant Major Barrett. To echo Sergeant Major Chandler, it
is exactly right. And we mentioned it earlier when we were
talking to Mr. Carter, and it was--for us, we wanted--we would
like to be able to put our dollars where we need them. We know
what is a priority to the United States Marine Corps.
The other thing is, we have been down this road before. We
have been a hollow force in the late 1970s and the early 1980s.
I came in at the very end of it, but I still felt it, and I
still saw it. I saw what it was like to get up on a Sunday
afternoon, put all your gear on, walk out to the rifle range,
bivouac behind the 500-yard line, shoot all week long, eat
behind the 500-yard line, pack your stuff up on a Friday night,
walk back six or seven miles, drop your stuff, clean your
weapons until Friday evening. And that was all because we
didn't have vehicles or we didn't have gas to put in the
vehicles, so we had to walk there, we had to live there, we had
to shoot there. And that is just kind of how business was.
So I grew up in a generation where I saw it. So it is not
our first time to the rodeo. Did we come out of it on the other
end a little bit smarter? Yes. We also came out thinner. There
was no more muscle. There was no more meat on the bone. And we
were already cutting into the bone. So we would prefer to make
the decisions as to where and how we put our dollars for the
best of the institution.
Mr. Nunnelee. And what about your planning in the 6 months
leading up to the sequestration?
Sergeant Major Barrett. The plan leading up to it, sir? I
will have to take that for a matter of the record, sir, and
respond appropriately, because I don't want to speak outside my
lane.
The Marine Corps commenced formal sequestration planning as
directed. This should not imply that significant work had not
previously been undertaken to prepare for a fiscal environment
characterized by declining resources. Since the passage of the
Budget Control Act in 2011, we have worked to assess the
potential impacts, optimize our force structure and prioritize
our requirements in order to meet what we acknowledge will be
significantly reduced funding.These are exceptionally complex
problems, and we have invested significant time and analysis to
understand the problem, frame our assumptions, assess impacts
against our mission, and determine what we could and could not
accomplish within these funding constraints. Despite these
upfront efforts, we could not assess the detailed impacts until
we executed detailed planning as opposed to higher level
assessments. The Marine Corps has worked to adapt to budgetary
reductions by continuing our tradition of pursuing ways to
streamline operations, identifying efficiencies, and
reinvesting savings in order to get the most out of every
dollar. It is this mentality that has allowed us to continue to
provide the best trained and equipped Marine units to
Afghanistan, even in this era of constrained resources.
CMSAF Cody. So, sir, I will cover the planning first.
Initially, our guidance was not to plan, as sequestration was
never to happen. I mean, it is a line in the sand to say,
``hey, this is so draconian, we have to make decisions and not
do this, because it would be so hurtful to the Nation.''
So I think initially there were discussions about what that
could mean, so certainly lots of discussion, but deliberate
planning, no, because--and then at a given point, we were
instructed not to plan for it, the Services were, so----
Mr. Nunnelee. You were instructed not to plan for
sequestration?
CMSAF Cody. There were instructions not to take any action
towards sequestration from--you know, because, again, there is
no authority to do that. We had submitted a budget, expected we
would receive that budget, and that was the planning phases
that were in place for us to prepare for that execution.
So as it became closer, obviously, you start to put things
together to say, ``well, if this happens, we have to be
prepared.'' And we did that.
But that really falls into, I think, the bigger point of
your question is, is we absolutely need the flexibility. And
this first year of sequestration without any flexibility really
hollows out the force, because you are unable to balance those
cuts to maintain a level of readiness that you may be able to
recover from over time.
There are things that will take place in the Air Force that
we will not recover from because of sequestration in this year.
Mr. Nunnelee. All right. Thank you.
And, Mr. Chairman, in the interests of time, I have got two
questions I would like to submit for the record. If it is okay,
can I just go ahead and put them on the table?
Let me just go ahead--and I won't ask for responses. I will
just ask you to put them in the record.
Question number one is, as your services look to control
the rising cost of military health care and benefits, what
steps will you take to ensure that our warriors and their
families have ready access to the care they need, both upon the
return from their deployment and then during their transition
from the Department of Defense to the V.A. health care system?
So if--and we will get you that in writing for the record.
Second question is how will your services balance the need
to find cost savings and benefits, such as tuition assistance
and family readiness programs, with the imperative that we keep
the faith with--and invest in the future of our all-volunteer
force?
So we will submit that for the record, Mr. Chairman. Thank
you. I yield.
Mr. Carter [presiding]. Mr. Bishop, do you have some
follow-up questions?
Mr. Bishop. No, thank you.
Mr. Carter. Well, I guess not. [Laughter.]
The chairman--follow-up questions--thank you--we are very,
very proud of you and all those that serve with you. Keep the
faith. We will make it better, okay? There is a lot of us that
are dedicated 100 percent to getting this deal fixed,
especially as it relates to you and the people you serve. God
bless you. We appreciate you.
[Questions for the record follow:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]