Richard Blumenthal Slams Army Secretary Driscoll Over ‘$25-40 Million’ Military Parade

Forbes Breaking News

During Thursday's Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) questioned Army Secretary Daniel Discoll about the upcoming military parade.

Transcript

00:00Thank you Senator Tuberville. Senator Blumenthal. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Thank

00:04you both for your service and thanks for being here today. I listened to your

00:12early response Secretary Driscoll about the cost of the celebration that's

00:17planned. Just to be absolutely clear I'm all in favor of celebrating the Army's

00:22250th. I'm hoping maybe we'll celebrate the Navy's as well having some Marine Corps

00:32background but I am struck by the cost 25 to 40 million dollars as Senator King

00:44said that's a pretty widespread and you're saying that it's due to the

00:49damage that may be caused. Is that the result of having tanks going through the

00:54streets of Washington and possibly tearing up the streets and what other

01:00damage would be done? To the cost Senator I think from our perspective we're

01:05optimistic and we'll be able to report to you after the parade. But why have

01:10tanks? Why this kind of parade? We believe we have a once-in-a-lifetime

01:16opportunity to fill up our recruiting pipeline with young Americans. Wouldn't

01:20your preference be to save money in light of the budget cuts we're seeing for

01:26training programs, freezes on hirings, shrinking staff levels, deferring

01:31maintenance, jeopardizing equipment maintenance? These problems are not

01:37theoretical. Wouldn't you agree that this money could be better spent? We don't have

01:43unlimited funds. Very sincerely Senator I think this is a once-in-a-lifetime

01:47opportunity to tell the story of the American Army. There are a lot of once-in-a-lifetime

01:51opportunities. We all have them but it doesn't mean that we spend money

01:57extravagantly. In fact it would be an honor to the Army to in fact devote those

02:06resources to where they're really needed and let me just cite to you the fact

02:11that the National Guard Bureau has yet to be reimbursed $38 million by the

02:17Department of Army for its essential work during the presidential inaugural mission.

02:22It isn't a minor oversight. This mission demanded the Guard's expertise in

02:29security and logistics and emergency response and the National Guard needs that

02:34money. Why are you stiffing the National Guard and spending 25 to 40 million on a

02:39parade? I'm not I'm not aware of the 38 million dollars that you're talking

02:47about Senator. We just went down yesterday that was one of the things that we're

02:51talking about that you know we were talking about some of the things that we

02:54need to put out there that we've been working through so I can follow up with

03:00you on that. Well I I hope that you will because I have a lot of trouble

03:09justifying to veterans who've been fired from positions in the federal government

03:14that we're spending potentially 40 million dollars on a parade when they

03:22have been fired because supposedly we have to eliminate waste including veterans who

03:29were in the Department of Veterans Affairs. I don't know how you can

03:35justify that kind of expenditure. Let me ask you drone warfare. Are you

03:43satisfied that we are doing enough to protect our bases in this country and

03:50elsewhere against the swarms of small lightweight drones such as Ukraine used in

03:58its operation spiderweb and such as terrorists used in the Middle East against

04:03our base in Jordan? I visited that area. I've heard personal descriptions from the

04:11troops there about what they fear in our inability to defend them against these

04:18types of small lightweight drones. Are you satisfied we're doing enough both on the

04:22offense to develop our drone warfare and in terms of defending our cities as well

04:29as our bases? Senator, we are not doing enough. The current status quo is not

04:35sufficient. We are rapidly trying to iterate and prototype and work with

04:42companies who actually are deploying their technologies into Ukraine. I think this is

04:48probably an instance where the United States can be a fast follower if we can

04:52ingest and suck out a lot of the lessons learned and the technology from

04:55Ukraine. I'm going to interrupt because my time is about to expire and I know the

04:59chairman will interrupt me but I have visited the Ukraine drone factories. I've

05:04spent some time in there with their military talking about their drones and I

05:10guarantee you they are at the tip of the spear. They are way ahead of us. We have a lot to

05:15learn from them and it's not just a luxury or convenience. We are at risk because of

05:22the technology that they have developed and the Russians are soon going to take

05:27from them because that's the pattern in this war. The Ukrainians take a step. The

05:32Russians try to keep up with them on drone warfare and I think we not only have a lot

05:41to learn but we have an obligation to learn it and I would like to ask you just because my time has

05:46expired for a briefing on this area which I think is revolutionizing modern warfare. Thank you.

05:55Senator, I think that's a very important goal. I would note for members that we will have a closed

06:05hearing immediately about 15 minutes after the adjournment of this and I would suggest that

06:11the senator would want to ask those questions. I would love a chance to address you on that topic.

06:19So let's do that. Even if with respect, Mr. Chairman, I'm not sure I'll be able to attend the

06:27closed briefing. I'm going to try but the briefing may not exhaust this topic. I would suggest a specific

06:33briefing on drone technology and warfare. All right. Well, there'll be no time limit and no limit on

06:41the subject matter. So we'll do the best we can and I hope the senator will be able to attend. Senator Schmidt.

06:48Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Category

Transcript

Recommended