You're watching...
Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman testifies on impact of $1 trillion in automatic Pentagon cuts
Also in this playlist...
Auto-advance: ON
Auto-advance
This transcript is automatically generated
-- a big story this morning there -- some dire new warnings from top military officials on the fate of our national security.
The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff testified before congress that one trillion.
In automatic defense cuts he says it could.
Lead to war.
We can't yet say precisely how bad the damage would be but it is clear that sequestration.
Would risk hollowing out our force and reducing its military options available to the nation.
We would go from being unquestionably.
Powerful everywhere.
To being less visible globally.
And presenting less of an overmatched to our adversaries.
And that would translate into a different deterrent calculus and potentially therefore.
Increase the likelihood of conflict.
So the Pentagon faces 500 billion in cuts over the next ten years.
If congress cannot agree to a budget deal before then.
And that's -- -- to be very likely at this point so those cuts would come on top of the 492.
Billion.
That President Obama and Republicans already agreed to last summer and the Pentagon had said that those cuts -- of themselves.
We're pretty tough for them handle.
Nonetheless these cuts that -- -- Joined now by new Hampshire Republican senator Kelly a -- she is on both the Senate Armed Services Committee.
And the Senate Budget Committee so this is right in your wheel house senator welcome good to have a -- -- -- morning -- so tell me you know what your take on this is what the impact would be.
And we all remember just by way -- going back for a -- this sequestration which would enact these cots were all due to the budget talks that fell apart.
Several months back.
It's because the super committee didn't come up with a savings in here we are.
I think it's irresponsible to allow these types of cuts to go forward you heard the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff say yesterday.
That there's increased potential for conflict because when America is not strong.
Other rogue actors around the world they'll bills they'll act look at where Ron is right now trying to.
Acquired the capability of having -- nuclear -- this is not a time to undermine our national security.
And what's deeply troubling Martha is the assisting -- on the Marines has said that -- this these cuts go forward.
The Marine Corps will be unable to respond to one major contingency think about it.
Meaning to protect our country and it's irresponsible for us to allow these -- cuts to our Department of Defense.
I wanna bring in some sound from Leon Panetta -- because he thinks that the place that you're standing is largely to blame.
Well let's -- recess.
It was designed as a media -- It was designed to be a disaster.
Because that the hope was because it's such a disaster that congress would respond.
And do what was right.
-- these cuts he's saying we're designed to be so all in RS.
That there was no way that a budget deal wouldn't be reached because nobody would want to get to the place that we are at right now.
And yet.
We let it happen and there doesn't seem to be any signs coming that that that that there's any avoiding -- at this point.
You know that's right Martha that's actually why I voted against -- -- I thought that from the beginning we shouldn't just on our jobs and come up -- The cuts that needed to be -- made without undermining our national security.
I'm the cosponsor of a bill that comes up with alternative spending reductions.
Because I don't think that we should fall down on the foremost responsibility we have to the American people.
So I've been asking members of both sides of the outcome to the table now and also where's the president on this is the commander in chief.
He should be leading an effort.
To make sure that we come up an alternative cuts so that we don't -- a -- -- force and put our men and women in the military at risk or our country at risk.
It also seems very out of balance in terms of what the costs would be.
If the budget deal was not reached because in the burden of that really -- on defense -- and it raises the question wouldn't it be better to have.
You know sort of and I shared pain.
Program.
Where defense which Republicans tend to you know be more supportive up and then entitlements on the other side would would.
Having equal pay and so that may be that would force everybody to the table.
-- -- Our Department of Defense is taking a very disproportionate.
Number of these cuts and that's our fundamental responsibility to the American people to keep us safe.
And I Martha you're actually right if we actually did a budget let's not forget -- serve on the Budget Committee.
Spent three years since the senate Democrats have wanted to do a budget.
If we took on the big picture of spending we wouldn't be undermining our national security with -- so congress meaning.
Particularly the senate Democrats need to come forward with the courage to address these fiscal issues and the president as well.
Because we we can do that and make sure that were still safe.
I gotta go -- but in it it -- what are the -- that's gonna happen before the election at any budget possibilities before the alleged that.
Before the election -- I.
And this -- I think.
I think there's going to be a lot of pressure on here is we're also talking approximately according to George Mason University a million jobs -- and notices for layoffs are gonna go out before the election so.
Members of congress need to address this now so that we can make sure that America remains strong right about that there's a lot of concerns that these -- would lead to a million jobs lost as well.
And that's the other big pain in this in this program Kelly thank you very much senator Hank Aaron good to have you with us -- --
