Hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee - Nominations
Statement
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
SEN. JAMES M. INHOFE (R-OK): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Let me first -- you've already adequately explained why Senator Warner isn't here, and I do have a statement. I'd like to read just two sentences out of his --
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
SEN. INHOFE: -- and then just put the entire thing in the record.
He says in talking about the three nominees today, he says: "I believe these nominees are excellent choices. I would like to further voice my unqualified support for their swift confirmation. I would also like to offer my thanks and gratitude to their families for their service and support."
Now, Mr. -- Senator Levin, Mr. Chairman, I am -- I have had a chance to get to know the nominees who are here today. I feel very good about it. I -- as you mentioned, Mr. Chairman, each one has just an excellent background and I think qualified for the positions for which they are nominated.
Mr. Young, you joined this staff at the Senate Appropriations Committee from the private sector in 1993. You served from 2001 to 2005 as assistant secretary of the Navy for research, development and acquisition and in 2005 became the director of defense engineering and technology, DOD's chief technology officer. Early this year, you were assigned duties as Secretary Krieg's principal deputy. The diversity of your experience provides you with unique qualifications to build on your predecessor, promising initiatives and programs, as well as to meet the pressing demands that come with the position of the chief procurement officer for the Department of Defense.
And Mr. Brook served as assistant secretary of the Army for financial management from 1990 to 1992. You have a wealth of experience in business, government, military service as a Navy Reserve Supply Corps officer and, most recently, in academia. We appreciate your willingness to leave your current position at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California, and return to Washington to serve in a similar capacity with the Department of Navy.
And I understand that Senator Warner introduced you at your last nomination hearing in February of 1990. I happened to be there at the time, and I'm sure he would endorse you, as I said in his opening statement.
Mr. Smolen -- Major General Smolen, I should say -- your Air Force service since your -- you commissioned in 1974 is extraordinary. I would only say that in all the accomplishments you've done, you conspicuously left off the most significant thing about your career and that is your two years as wing commander in Tinker Air Force Base in Oklahoma.
So without objection, I'd like to change that -- his resume to include that, Mr. Chairman. (Laughter.)
The positions to which you have all been nominated are enormously important to our national security and the organizations in which you serve. The personnel you will lead are some of the most dedicated public servants in the federal work force, and I believe that you folks are qualified to do that.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
SEN. INHOFE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Back many years ago at the first confirmation hearing of Secretary Rumsfeld, I was pointing out some problems, as I saw it, because, you know, the people of America have the expectation that we would have the best of everything and I -- (inaudible) -- that we did not.
And so in pursuing this with Secretary Rumsfeld, I said, you know, all the generals are going to get together and they're going to decide, what are we going to need 10 years from now and they're going to be wrong.
And I've said several times, Mr. Chairman, when I was in the House Armed Services Committee, we had someone in '94 testify that in 10 years we wouldn't need any ground troops.
So, I said, how do we resolve the problem? And he said, well, you know, for the entire 20th century the defense spending was 5.7 percent of GDP; after the draw-down of the '90s it went down to 2.7 percent.
Now, unfortunately when something happens and then you get into a war you've got to get the -- you got to spend money on the things that are bleeding the most and that isn't -- quite often that's not, you know, science and technology.
According to a recent press report, you recently sent a memorandum to the secretary of Defense in which you assess current spending of Defense science and technology as inadequate to keep pace with emerging threats.
Now the report concluded that the Pentagon has been, quote, "coasting on basic science investments of the last century," and noted that major corporations have disestablished science centers and research labs.
And you concluded, the reality is that the DOD is the predominant source of funds pursuing basic and applied research in the physical sciences.
Are you -- I guess the question would be, are you concerned about the adequacy of the current investment in science and technology, and what would you do to improve it?
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
SEN. INHOFE: Secretary, don't get me wrong, I agree with you. I would have probably sent the same report. You know, it goes beyond just science and tech; it is a problem that -- and so I guess what I'd ask you, and I'd ask all of -- everyone here -- as we go through the budget process, would be totally up front with us and make sure that we -- that you do have what is going to be necessary to meet these needs.
In a similar line, I'd ask Mr. Smolen -- General Smolen and Secretary Young the same thing.
As noted by the National Research Council in their report "Rising Above the Gathering Storm," U.S. advantages in sciences and tech have begun to erode. The United States is producing fewer scientists, engineers than our economic competitors such as India and China.
We all know this is true. And this is not something that you can correct from your position that I hope you'll be assuming. But we can look at our laws as they are right now in terms of recruiting people. It bothers me when I see India and China and other countries cranking out more scientists than we do.
Is there -- do you have any thoughts about that -- on how to correct this problem? Because I assume you agree it's a problem.
Either one of you.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
SEN. INHOFE: No, it's not -- almost.
Let me just ask you this question then if I could, Dr. Brook.
The committee is encouraged by the Department of Defense efforts to modernize its financial management systems and accountability.
The creation of the Business Transformation Agency within the Office of the Secretary of Defense and annual, detailed enterprise transition plans are positive signs toward the DOD getting its financial house in order.
Now, I would ask you that if you are confirmed, what priority would you assign to the review of the Navy's enterprise transition plan contributions and its financial management modernization?
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
SEN. INHOFE: All right, and I think that the chairman kind of talked about this, but not directly, about the DIMHRS program -- I think it's pronounced "dime-hers." And I'd kind of like to have your comment as to your support of the full implementation of that program.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source