POLISCOPE
Back to feed
FEDERALhearing transcript

House Subcommittee Hearing on 2017 Air Force Budget and Readiness

Original title: [H.A.S.C. NO. 114-92] DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY 2017 BUDGET REQUEST AND SEAPOWER AND PROJECTION FORCES

January 1, 2016

Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.

The Frame

What this does

The hearing establishes the legislative oversight process for the 2017 Air Force budget, which determines funding levels for military operations, training, and infrastructure that directly affect service members and national defense capabilities.

Who is mentioned in the record

Potentially affected actors named in the source documents. Mention is not a position.

U.S. Air Force

The agency's budget, operational readiness, and infrastructure funding are subject to the committee's review and authorization.

Subcommittee on Readiness members

Members are responsible for oversight and legislative action regarding the Department of Defense budget.

What changed

Last recorded activity January 1, 2016.

What's next

Next step not available in the current record.

Summary

This document is a transcript from a February 2016 House Armed Services Subcommittee hearing regarding the U.S. Air Force's budget request for fiscal year 2017. The committee reviewed the Air Force's , focusing on how budget allocations impact operations, training, and installation investments.

Key Facts

  • The hearing took place on February 12, 2016, in the Rayburn House Office Building.
  • The session focused on the Department of the Air Force's 2017 budget request and readiness posture.
  • This was the first of four scheduled hearings regarding service budget requests and readiness.
  • The committee examined risks associated with reduced installation investments identified in previous months.
  • The hearing included testimony from three high-ranking Air Force officials: General David L. Goldfein, Lt. Gen. John W. Raymond, and Lt. Gen. John Cooper.
  • The subcommittee's stated purpose was to clarify budget choices, funding priorities, and mitigation strategies for operational and training impacts.

Frequently Asked Questions

What was the primary purpose of this hearing?
The hearing was held to review the Air Force's 2017 budget request and assess how funding decisions affect military readiness, training, and operations.
Who testified at this hearing?
General David L. Goldfein (Vice Chief of Staff), Lieutenant General John W. Raymond (Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations), and Lieutenant General John Cooper (Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics, Engineering, and Force Protection).

Why It Matters

The hearing establishes the legislative oversight process for the 2017 Air Force budget, which determines funding levels for military operations, training, and infrastructure that directly affect service members and national defense capabilities.

News Coverage

No news coverage found yet. Articles are indexed twice daily.

Sponsors

Discoveries

Patterns POLISCOPE noticed across the record. These are observations to investigate, not conclusions.

temporal pattern90% confidence

Budget Cycle Oversight

The hearing is part of a structured four-part series of hearings on service readiness, indicating a systematic approach to the annual budget authorization process.

Connected Entities

locationLangley Air Force BaseMilitary installation referenced by the ChairmanMap →
personRobert J. WittmanChairman of the Subcommittee on ReadinessMap →
personMadeleine Z. BordalloRanking Member of the Subcommittee on ReadinessMap →
organizationHouse Committee on Armed ServicesCongressional committee overseeing the hearingMap →
personDavid L. GoldfeinGeneral, U.S. Air Force, Vice Chief of StaffMap →
personJohn W. RaymondLieutenant General, U.S. Air Force, Deputy Chief of Staff for OperationsMap →
locationAndersen Air Force BaseMilitary installation referenced by the Ranking MemberMap →
personJohn CooperLieutenant General, U.S. Air Force, Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics, EngineeMap →

Sources

Open source document

www.govinfo.gov

Analysis Score

0–100
  • Significance40
    How much this matters to a regular citizen
  • Controversy10
    Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
  • Entertainment5
    Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
  • Buzz5
    Current news / social attention level

Publisher tools

Share or embed this record

POLISCOPE publisher tools

Share or embed this record