UnitedStatesAirForce

Presentation
Before the Senate Armed Services
Committee

FiscalYear2016
AirForcePosture

Witness Statement of
The Honorable Ms. Deborah Lee James,
Secretary of the Air Force
General Mark A. Welsh III, USAF
Chief of Staff

March 5, 2015

FiscalYear2016AirForcePostureStatement
March5,2015

Contents

I.Introduction...............................................................................................................................................9
II.AGloballyEngagedForce........................................................................................................................10
III.CapacityandCapability:ADualProblem...............................................................................................11
IV.PolicyandPurseStrings.........................................................................................................................13
V.DoingWhatWeCan................................................................................................................................16
VI.AnInvestmentinGlobalInfluence........................................................................................................17
VII.Conclusion.............................................................................................................................................19

Page 2

FiscalYear2016AirForcePostureStatement
March5,2015

UNITED STATES AIR FORCE

DEBORAH LEE JAMES

Deborah Lee James is the Secretary of the Air
Force, Washington, D.C. She is the 23rd
Secretary of the Air Force and is responsible
for the affairs of the Department of the Air
Force, including the organizing, training,
equipping and providing for the welfare of its
more than 690,000 active duty, Guard, Reserve
and civilian Airmen and their families. She also
oversees the Air Force's annual budget of more
than $110 billion.
Ms. James has 30 years of senior homeland and
national security experience in the federal
government and the private sector. Prior to her
current position, Ms. James served as President
of Science Applications International
Corporation's Technical and Engineering
Sector, where she was responsible for 8,700
employees and more than $2 billion in revenue.
For nearly a decade, Ms. James held a variety of positions with SAIC to include Senior Vice
President and Director of Homeland Security. From 2000 to 2001, she was Executive Vice
President and Chief Operating Officer at Business Executives for National Security, and from
1998 to 2000 she was Vice President of International Operations and Marketing at United
Technologies.
During the Clinton Administration, from 1993 to 1998, Ms. James served in the Pentagon as the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs. In that position, she was the Secretary of

Page 3

FiscalYear2016AirForcePostureStatement
March5,2015

Defenses senior advisor on all matters pertaining to the 1.8 million National Guard and Reserve
personnel worldwide. In addition to working extensively with Congress, state governors, the
business community, military associations, and international officials on National Guard and
Reserve component issues, she oversaw a $10 billion budget and supervised a 100-plus-person
staff. Prior to her Senate confirmation in 1993, she served as an assistant to the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Legislative Affairs.
From 1983 to 1993, she worked as a professional staff member on the House Armed Services
Committee, where she served as a senior advisor to the Military Personnel and Compensation
Subcommittee, the NATO Burden Sharing Panel, and the Chairmans Member Services team.
Ms. James earned a Bachelor of Arts degree in comparative area studies from Duke University
and a masters degree in international affairs from Columbia University School of International
and Public Affairs.
EDUCATION
1979 Bachelor of Arts degree in comparative area studies, Duke University, Durham, N.C.
1981 Masters degree in international affairs, Columbia University, N.Y.
CAREER CHRONOLOGY
1. 1983 - 1993, Professional Staff Member, Armed Services Committee, U.S. House of
Representatives, Washington, D.C.
2. 1993 - 1998, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs, Office of the Secretary of
Defense, Washington, D.C.
3. 1999 - 2000, Vice President of International Operations and Marketing, United Technologies,
Washington, D.C.
4. 2000 - 2001, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Business Executives for
National Security, Washington, D.C.
5. 2002 - 2013, Senior Vice President and Director for Homeland Security; Senior Vice
President, C4IT Business Unit General Manager; Executive Vice President, Communications
and Government Affairs; President, Technical and Engineering Sector, Science Applications
International Corporation, McLean, Va.
6. 2013 - present, Secretary of the Air Force, Washington, D.C.
(Current as of December 2013)

Page 4

FiscalYear2016AirForcePostureStatement
March5,2015

UNITED STATES AIR FORCE

GENERAL MARK A. WELSH III

Gen. Mark A. Welsh III is Chief of Staff of
the U.S. Air Force, Washington, D.C. As
Chief, he serves as the senior uniformed Air
Force officer responsible for the organization,
training and equipping of 690,000 activeduty, Guard, Reserve and civilian forces
serving in the United States and overseas. As
a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the
general and other service chiefs function as
military advisers to the Secretary of Defense,
National Security Council and the President.
General Welsh was born in San Antonio,
Texas. He entered the Air Force in June 1976
as a graduate of the U.S. Air Force Academy.
He has been assigned to numerous
operational, command and staff positions.
Prior to his current position, he was
Commander, U.S. Air Forces in Europe.
EDUCATION
1976 Bachelor of Science degree, U.S. Air Force Academy, Colorado Springs, Colo.
1984 Squadron Officer School, by correspondence
1986 Air Command and Staff College, by correspondence
1987 Master of Science degree in computer resource management, Webster University
1988 Army Command and General Staff College, Fort Leavenworth, Kan.
1990 Air War College, by correspondence
1993 National War College, Fort Lesley J. McNair, Washington, D.C.

Page 5

FiscalYear2016AirForcePostureStatement
March5,2015

1995 Fellow, Seminar XXI, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge

1998 Fellow, National Security Studies Program, Syracuse University and John Hopkins
University, Syracuse, N.Y.
1999 Fellow, Ukrainian Security Studies, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard
University, Cambridge, Mass.
2002 The General Manager Program, Harvard Business School, Harvard University, Cambridge,
Mass.
2009 Fellow, Pinnacle Course, National Defense University, Fort Lesley J. McNair, Washington,
D.C.
2009 Leadership at the Peak, Center for Creative Leadership, Colorado Springs, Colo.
ASSIGNMENTS
1. August 1976 - July 1977, Student, undergraduate pilot training, Williams Air Force Base,
Ariz.
2. July 1977- January 1981, T-37 Instructor Pilot and class commander, Williams AFB, Ariz.
3. January 1981 - May 1981, Student, fighter lead-in training, Holloman AFB, N.M.
4. May 1981 - August 1981, Student, A-10 training, Davis-Monthan AFB, Ariz.
5. August 1981 - May 1984, Instructor pilot, Flight Commander and wing standardization and
evaluation Flight Examiner, 78th Tactical Fighter Squadron and 81st Tactical Fighter Wing,
Royal Air Force Woodbridge, England
6. May 1984 - June 1987, Commander, Cadet Squadron 5, later, executive officer to the
Commandant of Cadets, U.S. Air Force Academy, Colorado Springs, Colo.
7. June 1987 - June 1988, Student, Army Command and General Staff College, Fort
Leavenworth, Kan.
8. June 1988 - October 1988, Student, F-16 conversion training, Luke AFB, Ariz.
9. October 1988 - July 1992, Operations Officer, 34th Tactical Fighter Squadron, later,
Commander, 4th Tactical Fighter Squadron, Hill AFB, Utah
10. July 1992 - June 1993, Student, National War College, Fort Lesley J. McNair, Washington,
D.C.
11. June 1993 - June 1995, Chief, Defense and Space Operations Division, Operations
Directorate (J3), Joint Staff, the Pentagon, Washington, D.C.
12. June 1995 - April 1997, Commander, 347th Operations Group, Moody AFB, Ga.
13. April 1997 - June 1998, Commander, 8th Fighter Wing, Kunsan Air Base, South Korea
14. June 1998 - June 1999, Commander, College of Aerospace Doctrine, Research and
Education, Maxwell AFB, Ala.
15. June 1999 - September 2001, Commandant of Cadets and Commander, 34th Training Wing,
U.S. Air Force Academy, Colorado Springs, Colo.
16. September 2001 - April 2003, Director of Plans and Programs, Headquarters U.S. Air Forces
in Europe, Ramstein Air Base, Germany
17. April 2003 - June 2005, Director of Global Power Programs, Office of the Assistant

Page 6

FiscalYear2016AirForcePostureStatement
March5,2015

Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Headquarters U.S. Air Force, Washington, D.C.
18. June 2005 - June 2007, Deputy Commander, Joint Functional Component Command for
Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance, U.S. Strategic Command, Bolling AFB,
Washington, D.C.
19. July 2007 - August 2008, Vice Commander, Air Education and Training Command,
Randolph AFB, Texas
20. August 2008 - December 2010, Associate Director of the Central Intelligence Agency for
Military Support/Associate Director for Military Affairs, Central Intelligence Agency,
Washington, D.C.
21. December 2010 - July 2012, Commander, U.S. Air Forces in Europe; Commander, Air
Component Command, Ramstein Air Base, Germany; and Director, Joint Air Power
Competency Center, Ramstein Air Base, Germany
22. August 2012 - present, Chief of Staff, Headquarters U.S. Air Force, Washington, D.C.
SUMMARY OF JOINT ASSIGNMENTS
1. June 1993 - June 1995, Chief, Defense and Space Operations Division, Operations Directorate
(J3), Joint Staff, the Pentagon, Washington, D.C., as a lieutenant colonel and a colonel
2. June 2005 - June 2007, Deputy Commander, Joint Functional Component Command for
Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance, U.S. Strategic Command, Bolling AFB,
Washington, D.C., as a major general
3. August 2008 - December 2010, Associate Director for Military Affairs, Central Intelligence
Agency, Washington, D.C., as a major general and a lieutenant general
4. December 2010 - July 2012, Commander, U.S. Air Forces in Europe; Commander, Air
Component Command, Ramstein Air Base; and Director, Joint Air Power Competency Center,
Ramstein Air Base, Germany, as a general
FLIGHT INFORMATION
Rating: Command pilot
Flight hours: More than 3,300
Aircraft flown: F-16, A-10, T-37 and TG-7A
MAJOR AWARDS AND DECORATIONS
Defense Distinguished Service Medal with oak leaf cluster
Distinguished Service Medal with oak leaf cluster
Defense Superior Service Medal with oak leaf cluster
Legion of Merit with oak leaf cluster
Distinguished Flying Cross with oak leaf cluster
Meritorious Service Medal with two oak leaf clusters
Air Medal with oak leaf cluster
Aerial Achievement Medal

Page 7

FiscalYear2016AirForcePostureStatement
March5,2015

Joint Service Commendation Medal

Air Force Commendation Medal
EFFECTIVE DATES OF PROMOTION
Second Lieutenant June 2, 1976
First Lieutenant June 2, 1978
Captain June 2, 1980
Major May 1, 1985
Lieutenant Colonel June 1, 1989
Colonel Feb. 1, 1994
Brigadier General Aug. 1, 2000
Major General Aug. 1, 2003
Lieutenant General Dec. 9, 2008
General Dec. 13, 2010

Page 8

FiscalYear2016AirForcePostureStatement
March5,2015

I. Introduction
The United States Air Force is the most globally engaged air force on the planet.
American Airmen are in constant defense of our national interests, whether dropping
bombs, commanding satellites in space, delivering humanitarian relief, or protecting the
homeland with an array of air, space, and cyberspace capabilities our forefathers could
never have imagined. Airmen collaborate and train with allies expanding and
strengthening our collective capabilities and guarantee the global freedom of
movement and access that Americans have come to expect. Alongside its Sister
Services, Americas Air Force delivers our Nation the power, influence, agility, and
global reach no other country currently possesses...no matter the effort, no matter the
odds. Our Airmen are warfighters and they bring airpower to bear on behalf of America
every day.

But 24 years of continual combat operations, coupled with constrained and unstable
budgets, has taken its toll. America needs a force ready for a spectrum of operations
more global and complex than ever before. Instead, a relentless operations tempo, with
fewer resources to fund, coordinate, and execute training and exercises, has left a force
proficient in only those portions of the mission necessary for current operations. This is
not the Air Force America expectsbut today, it is the Air Force America owns.

Todays Air Force is the smallest and oldest it has ever been, even while the demand
for airpower continues to climb. There is no excess; there is no bench everything is
committed. When called into action, todays Air Force cannot respond in one corner of
the Earth without diluting its presence elsewhere. The blanket of American airpower
covering the globe has thinned; in places, it is nearly threadbare. As we have cut our
capacity, we have found our capability equally diminished the two qualities are
inextricably linked.

The Nation deserves an Air Force that can outmatch its most dangerous enemies at
their peak of power the most demanding warfighting scenario, not just the low-end

Page 9

FiscalYear2016AirForcePostureStatement
March5,2015

fight. The Presidents Budget (PB) takes a critical step toward recovering that Air
Force, but make no mistake: even at PB levels, the Air Force remains stressed to do
what the Nation asks of us. To truly reverse the erosion of American airpower requires
sustained commitment, stability, and the decision-space to invest each taxpayer dollar
where it can best deliver the most combat power.

Without bold leadership today difficult decisions and a commitment to air, space, and
cyberspace investment Americas airpower advantage is increasingly at risk.

II. A Globally Engaged Force

At the Nations call, American Airmen leap to defend her interests. They respond at all
hours, on any day, anywhere in the world, and they do it whether the requirement has
been planned for or not. After all, enemies (and disasters) rarely strike when expected.

On the eve of 2014, the Nation and the Air Force planned for a relatively quiet year.
We expected to draw down combat forces in Afghanistan, and have an opportunity to
reset and reconstitute our forces.

Instead, the Ukraine and a resurgent Russia happened. Ebola happened. The Islamic
State happened. Airmen flew 19,959 offensive sorties, releasing 8,249 weapons1 in
support of U.S. Central Command alone. Air Force tankers offloaded 172 million
gallons of fuel to Joint and coalition air forces, and Airmen flew 79,445 airlift missions in
operations on every continent. 2 We kept watch over our enemies, collecting and
analyzing over 18 million images and 1.6 million hours of full motion videoand we
evacuated 6,075 wounded Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, and civilians from the
battle space. Instead of slowing down, our force sped up.

The Air Force was equally busy at home, providing capability most Americans never
have to think about. Airmen launched nine national security space missions

1
2

TheseincludeCloseAirSupport,Escort,andInterdictionsorties.DatafromAFCENTAirpowerSummary
TankerAirliftControlCenterOfficeofPublicAffairs

Page 10

FiscalYear2016AirForcePostureStatement
March5,2015

bolstering GPS, weather, and Space Situational Awareness capabilities to benefit

military and civilian users alike. They engaged with allies to build America's space
partnerships; and worked to qualify potential new launch providers to increase
competition, reduce costs, and assure American access to space in the future. And
Airmen began the long, critical work of revitalizing two of the three legs of our Nations
nuclear triad, gathering over 300 recommendations from the field on how to improve Air
Force nuclear cultureand then implemented those ideas, to the tune of $50 million in
fiscal year 2014 (FY14) and a planned $154 million in FY15.

Airmen provide access, overwatch, protection, and staying power for American and
coalition forces the world over. They degrade adversary capabilities, and re-affirm
every day that America can project power anywhere in the world, at the time and place
of our choosing. That power that presence, at home and abroad is among the
strongest deterrents confronting the Nations would-be enemiesand protecting our
National interests.

III. Capacity and Capability: A Dual Problem

Americans have invested in airpower for well over 60 years to ensure the fight is never
fair. But today after many years of continual operations and a few fiscal upheavals
the Nation is at a crossroads, with a fundamental disconnect between its airpower
expectations and its airpower capability.

There was a time when the Air Force could trade some capacity in order to retain
capability. But we have reached the point where the two are inextricable; lose any more
capacity, and the capability will cease to exist.

The Services intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) force is a sobering

example of this critical nexus. In todays warfighting environment there is nearly infinite

Page 11

FiscalYear2016AirForcePostureStatement
March5,2015

appetite for Air Force ISR3 we simply do not have the capacity to fulfill it. To meet as
much of the demand as possible, Airmen work 10- to 12-hour shifts on a 7-on, 1-off
pattern, flying over 900 hours a year a rate that can accumulate a careers worth of
flying hours in a single assignment. These are combat shifts, physically, mentally, and
emotionally taxingand to get it done, they are sometimes diverted from training that
allows them to improve, advance, and build a professional military career. When such
Airmen are faced with the decision to separate or continue to serve, it is difficult to
convince them that staying is in their best interests. We are losing them at a rate faster
than we can replace them.

At some point, no level of effort will cover the capacity gap created by continual
worldwide operations and dwindling, uncertain budgets. The capability itself will fail.

The fleet offers another case in point. Todays Air Force is both the smallest and oldest
it has ever been. Since Operation DESERT STORM in 1991, the Air Force cut its total
aircraft inventory from 8,600 to 5,452. During that same time period, we cut Active,
Guard, Reserve, and civilian Airmen from 946,000 to little more than 662,000 (just
313,000 on active duty). The average age of Air Force aircraft is 27 years, with many
fleets substantially older.
The newest B-52 bomber is 53 years old. In at least one Air Force family, three
generations of Airmen have piloted the Stratofortress, in combat engagements from
Vietnam to ENDURING FREEDOM (see boxed text below).

Areturntosequestrationwouldresultin50percentofthehighaltitudeISRmissionsbeingflowntodaynolonger
beingavailable.Commanderswouldlose30percentoftheirabilitytocollectintelligenceandtargetingdata
againstmovingvehiclesonthebattlefield.

Page 12

FiscalYear2016AirForcePostureStatement
March5,2015

Three Generations of B-52 Airmen

Captain Daniel Welch graduated from the Air Force Academy in 2008, and began flying the B-52 in March
of 2010. His father, Lieutenant Colonel Don Welch, was assigned to Guam in the early 1980s, a B-52 flight
crew member during the Cold War. And Daniels grandfather, Colonel Don Sprague, flew the mighty B-52
in combat missions in Vietnam, earning the Distinguished Flying Cross for his service.
The B-52 that Daniels grandfather flew was designed in the 1950s for its strategic strike capability,
deterring direct aggression from our enemies. It was capable and it was credible. Under current
recapitalization plans, the Air Force will try to keep this venerable airplane flying until at least 2040that is
enough years to let a fourth generation of the Sprague-Welch family grow, graduate, and fly the B-52 as
well. But how capable, and by extension how credible, will a 90-year-old bomber be in the world 25 years
from today?
The Nation broadly invested in capacity to cover the globe decades agobut if we do not have capacity
with the right capability to meets todays needs, what is perceived as credible capability is merely an illusion.

By automobile standards, 12 fleets of Air Force aircraft are authorized antique license
plates in the state of Virginia. The Air Force can (and does) continue to patch these
older platforms up and fly them in combat. But after extending their service life time and
time again, each airframe reaches the point where it cannot be patched up anymore.
It must be replaced or it fails.

With aging aircraft and stressed fleets, todays capacity, as small as it is, is something
of an illusion. The numbers are there barely but the capability to command global
influence is tenuous. What was, in earlier times, a blanket of airpower covering the
globe, has been worn to mere threads.

IV. Policy and Purse Strings

The world continues to change at an unprecedented pace and operational requirements
continue unabated. The demands for global engagement is challenging under any
circumstancebut when combined with an uncertain budget environment, it drives the
Air Force indeed, all Services to make incredibly difficult choices, pitting vital
requirement against vital requirement.

Page 13

FiscalYear2016AirForcePostureStatement
March5,2015

When budgets contract and budgetary policy is continually postponed, or written in a

way that limits Service solutions to budget problems, decision-space shrinks, and
already difficult budget choices become nearly impossible.

In FY12, when the Air Force originally forecast its requirements to meet the Defense
Strategic Guidance, the Service planned an FY16 topline of $134 billion. Today as
enacted in FY15, and so requested in the FY16 PB that topline has decreased to
$122 billion. In aggregate, the loss across those five years is $64 billion (see chart I
below).

Chart I: Lost Capability

To put this into perspective, if the Air Force shut off all utilities turned off the lights, the
heating and air conditioning, the water supply at all our major installations for 12
years4or if it quit flying for 20 months did not burn any jet fuel at all for nearly 2
yearsit would save only $12 billion. Enough to buy back one year of sequestered
funds. Money matters; the lost capability is real; and the impact is going to be
significant.

ThisnumberreflectsthecostofutilitiesonlyatUSAirForceinstallationsitdoesnotreflectinstallations
investmentswritlarge(andthusdoesnotportrayinanywaythesavingswhichcouldbeassociatedwithbase
realignmentandclosure)

Page 14

FiscalYear2016AirForcePostureStatement
March5,2015

In addition, both budget uncertainty and legislative programming restrictions have left
the Air Force with very limited decision-space over the past three years. Tightly
constrained on aircraft divestiture and denied Base Realignment and Closure, leaves
the Service with only a few accounts to yield savings from quickly and cleanly, without
violating must pay requirements: readiness, people, and modernization. From these,
the Air Force worked hard to identify the least catastrophic choices it could.

The Air Force took risk in infrastructure. Our investment in maintenance and repair
including restoration, modernization, sustainment, and new construction to recapitalize
Air Force facilities and infrastructure is just 1.9 percent of the Services plant
replacement value. Private industry standard is between six and eight percent
investment.5

Unable to cut airframes we believe we need to divest or to reduce excess base

capacity; the Service has cut personnel taking risk in human capital. Since 2001,
even as the Nation fought in Afghanistan and Iraq, Air Force uniformed end-strength
dropped by 44,000 Airmen.6 We simply cannot get any smaller or we risk being too
small to succeed.

We have also been forced to cut into some of the programs that keep Airmen and
airpower a step ahead of the enemy at all times. In 2013, for example, an entire
Weapons School class which produces the world's best tactical and operational
airpower experts was cancelled.

Risk and tough choices are part of every business. The problem, for the Air Force, is
that failure is never an option. Airmen will fix it, patch it, make do, and work until they
drop to cover shortfalls. But asking it of them, year in and year out, risks unbearable
strain on a force heavily engaged around the globe.

andNationalResearchCouncilstudiesindicatethataninvestmentbetweentwoandfourpercentofPRVis
warrantedtoavoidriskofaccelerateddeteriorationandinfrastructurefailure.
6
FY2011FY2014Active,Guard,andReserve

Page 15

FiscalYear2016AirForcePostureStatement
March5,2015

V. Doing What We Can

Recognizing that budget uncertainty and a need for fiscal restraint may be here to
stay, the Air Force has extended its institutional gaze out 30 years to synchronize
budget and acquisition decisions with strategy. To guide this effort, in 2014 the Service
published Americas Air Force: A Call to the Future,7 a ground-breaking new strategic
framework. This framework calls for strategic agility to confront the rapidly-changing
global environment, and in conjunction with the upcoming Air Force Strategic Master
Plan will provide guideposts and long-range resourcing vectors with which to make
the difficult tradeoffs required in years to come.

In the more immediate-term, the Air Force has realized value through its Every Dollar
Counts (EDC) campaign. At the heart of EDC is the Secretary of the Air Forces
challenge to every Airman to take ownership of the processes they touch and to look for
better ways to do business. EDC initiatives run the gamut, from soliciting grassroots
savings ideas to overhauling Air Force acquisition practices. Efforts within the
campaign have reduced energy costs by approximately $1 billion, and identified another
$1.3 billion in potential savings through Better Buying Power practices and the Air
Forces partner initiative, Bending the Cost Curve. We project another $35.4 million in
savings proposed by Airmen, and have found opportunities to save $190 million over
the next five years by analyzing War Readiness Engine requirements. The savings are
already planned for reinvestment in readiness, as well as to modernize equipment and
infrastructure.

Budgetary constraints also spurred the Air Force to re-evaluate the way it does
business with its installations host communities, and seek alternatives to the status
quo. The Air Force Community Partnerships Initiative makes unprecedented use of
public-public and public-private (P4) partnerships, leveraging the existing resources and
capabilities of installations, state and local communities, and commercial entities to
achieve mutual value and benefit for all. There are now 47 installations in the Air Force

http://airman.dodlive.mil/files/2014/07/AF_30_Year_Strategy_2.pdf

Page 16

FiscalYear2016AirForcePostureStatement
March5,2015

Partnership Program who identified more than 1,000 initiatives across the spectrum of
installation services and mission supportand many of these initiatives are developing
further with potential application Air Force-wide.

Additionally, the Air Force unequivocally relies on three strong components Active,
Guard, and Reserve to sustain the force required to meet strategic uncertainty, fiscal
constraint, and rapidly evolving threats head-on. The Air Force is absolutely committed
to leveraging the distinct and complementary characteristics of its Total Force more
effectivelyand to do that, Airmen must be postured to operate cohesively and
seamlessly as one team. Over the last year, dialogue with stakeholders provided
valuable perspective and mutual understanding about the necessary size and shape
of the future Air Force. The Service spent 2014 thoroughly analyzing 80 percent of its
mission areas and platforms, taking a close look at component balance. Over the
course of the next year, the Air Force will continue evaluating the remaining 20 percent
of the mission areasand continue ongoing work to break down organizational, policy,
and cultural barriers to seamless operations.

The Air Force is a committed steward of Americas resources, saving or avoiding

costs to the tune of billions of dollars through the ingenuity of Airmen. Yet even those
billions fall far short of making up the losses of the past three years. We need a stable
funding profile, and support for the tough fiscal decisions required, if we are to meet the
complex global challenges of the coming years.

VI. An Investment in Global Influence

America is an airpower nation; we have enjoyed unrivaled success in the air for the past
70 years. But future success is not a birthright, and air and space superiority is not an
entitlement. It must be earned. Without it, American influence diminishes and the U.S.
military will be forced to radically change how it goes to war. Americans will be put in
danger, and our leaders options will be markedly limited. Our adversaries know this
and are taking steps to tip the balance in their favor.

Page 17

FiscalYear2016AirForcePostureStatement
March5,2015

We cannot let this happen. We must invest in the force required today and invest in the
force we will need tomorrow.

The FY16 PB request is the result of difficult, purposeful, strategy-based resourcing

decisions made to meet obligations set in the Defense Strategic Guidance. It aligns
with Department of Defense and Air Force 30-year strategies; continues to regain
ground in our ability to wage full-spectrum operations; maximizes the contributions of
the Total Force; reinforces investments in nuclear deterrence and space control
operations; emphasizes global, long-range and non-permissive capabilities; and
focuses on unique capabilities the Air Force provides to the Joint fight. It funds our
greatest asset Airmen by halting the active duty manpower drawdown and
reinvesting pay and compensation savings in Airmens quality-of-life programs. And it
preserves the Air Forces top three acquisition priorities: F-35; KC-46; and the longrange strike bomber.

The FY16 PB request also reflects changes in the global landscape, buying back
combat capabilities in areas where the Air Force accepted risk in the FY15 PB the
E-8, JSTARS, and F-15C. U-2 and E-3 AWACS divestment is re-phased to FY19, so
we can continue to operate those platforms and meet combatant commanders most
urgent needs. And weve increased funding for the nuclear enterprise, space, cyber,
ISR, and command and control improvements, investing in the Nation's strategic
deterrence and high demand airpower assets.

This budget cannot stand alone it must serve as a point of departure for future years
stable, committed investment in global airpower for America. A return to sequestrationlevel funding will devastate readiness and modernization; it will force the Air Force to
depart from a long-term, strategic planning framework in favor of one that triages only
those things absolutely required in the short-term. It will reverse incremental progress
made over the past two years in the recovery from FY13s sequestration-level funding
and will make it impossible to meet current operational requirements or execute the
Defense Strategic Guidance. Under a sequestration-level budget, we will be forced to

Page 18

FiscalYear2016AirForcePostureStatement
March5,2015

recommend divesting critical airpower capabilities like the KC-10 and U-2 fleets.
Overdue investments in the nuclear enterprise will be reduced and technologies vital to
future capability and the American industrial base like the promising Adaptive Engine
Program will be halted.

VII. Conclusion
The United States Air Force is the worlds best. American Airmen are warfighters. The
air, space, and cyberspace capabilities they bring to bear strike fear in the hearts of our
enemies. If you are a threat, the Air Force can see you; it can reach you; and it can
strike you. We must keep it that way.

As Airmen continue to support and defend Americas interests around the globe
engaging in active combat and operational missions worldwide the Nation must
acknowledge the serious disconnect between the Air Force it expects, the Air Force it
has today, and the Air Force it is funding for the future. Todays Air Force is the
smallest and oldest it has ever beenand a high operational tempo, paired with a
constrained and uncertain budget environment, only accelerates this trend. The Nation
must invest in new technologies, in training, infrastructure, and personnel, if it intends to
continue operating as a global superpower.

The FY16 PB request preserves the minimum requirement to meet current strategy.
But even at the PB level, the Air Force remains stressed and shortfalls exist. Reversion
to sequestration-level funding will carry great risk for American Airmen, and for America
itself.

The Fiscal Year 2016 Presidents Budget request is an investment in a force we hope
the Nation will never have to use. But if the turbulent and largely unexpected global
developments of 2014 prove anything, they prove this: Americas Air Force must be
ready to engage anytime, anywhere, and across the full spectrum of warfare. America
expects it, combatant commanders require it, and our Airmen deserve it.

Page 19