WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) spoke on the Senate floor today in support of increased funding for the United States military. Graham, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, criticized both Republicans and Democrats who oppose an increase in defense spending at a time when military leaders are warning of equipment shortages and lack of readiness preparations.

•  “Everybody loves the military. Well, your love doesn't help them. Your love doesn't buy a damn thing. If you love these men and women, you will adequately fund their needs. If you care about them and their families, you will adjust the budget so they can fight a war on our behalf.” - http://bit.ly/1VOP3PP

• “Here’s what the Commandant of the Marine Corps said about the current state of readiness. Our aviation units are currently unable to meet our training and mission requirements primarily due to ready basic aircraft shortfalls. I can tell you in the Marine Corps today, 70 percent of the F-18's have a problem meeting combat status. I can tell you today that the Army is stretched unlike any time I've ever seen. I can tell you today that the Navy is robbing Peter to pay Paul to keep the ships on the ocean and with the numbers we have in terms of defense spending, they're having to forego modernization to deal with the readiness, to deal with the ability to fight the war.” - http://bit.ly/1ZBBkLy

• “If you vote no, then as far as I'm concerned, you better never say I love the military anymore. Because if you really love them, you’d do something about it.” - http://bit.ly/24DbPul

•  “Over the last seven or eight years, we've cut $1 trillion out of the United States military. We're on track to have the smallest Army since 1940, the smallest Navy since 1915, the smallest Air Force in modern times. We're on track to spend half of what we normally spend in time of war. Normally we spend about 4.5 percent G.D.P. to defend this nation. We're on track by 2021 to spend 2.3 percent of G.D.P. This in my view is an emergency.” - http://bit.ly/22W7pj7

• “Discretionary spending is not the reason we're in debt. We're spending at a 2008 level. So these blind across-the-board cuts limited to discretionary spending a lot of programs are not even subject to sequestration is not moving the debt needle. It is destroying the ability to defend this country.” - http://bit.ly/24DdpMM

Copy of transcript below:

Mr. GRAHAM:

Here's the issue. To those who are a slave to these sequestration caps, to those who believe that sequestration in this budget practice were involved is going to save the country, boy, I couldn't disagree with you more.

We haven't moved the debt needle at all. Discretionary spending is not the reason we're in debt. We're spending at a 2008 level. So these blind across-the-board cuts limited to discretionary spending a lot of programs are not even subject to sequestration is not moving the debt needle. It is destroying the ability to defend this country.

So the theory we're advocating here today is that there's an emergency in the United States military that needs to be addressed and we should be able to add money to the united States military, the department of defense based on an emergency that's real and not be limited by caps that are insane.

So here's the issue. Is there an emergency in terms of readiness? Is there an emergency in terms of operation and maintenance? Are we putting the ability to modernize our force at risk in an emergency situation because we don't have enough money to fight the wars we're in and modernize the force for the wars to come?

If you don't believe us, here's would the Commandant of the Marine Corps said about the current state of readiness. Our aviation units are currently unable to meet our training mission requirements primarily due to ready basic aircraft shortfalls. I can tell you in the Marine Corps today, 70% of the F-18's have a problem meeting combat status. I can tell you today that the Army is stretched unlike any time I've ever seen. I can tell you today that the Navy is robbing Peter to pay Paul to keep the ships on the ocean and with the numbers we have in terms of defense spending, they're having to forego modernization to deal with the readiness, to deal with the ability to fight the war.

I can tell you that the commandant of the Marine Corps is going to take six B-22's out of Spain that are used to rescue consulates and embassies that come under attack in Africa because we need those planes to train pilots, and if we don't bring those planes back, we're not going to have an air worthy B-22 force at a time we need it. You're creating a hole in a vacuum in our ability to protect our diplomats and U.S. Citizens in Africa. Could I just add one thing…

Mr. MCCAIN:

It was at the hearing when general Milley, the chief of staff of the United States Army test identified the Army risks not having ready forces available to provide flexible options to our national leadership and most importantly, risks incurring significantly increased U.S. Casualties. I say to my colleagues that are going to vote against this, you are taking on a heavy burden of responsibility of incurring significantly increased U.S. Casualties in case of an emergency. The military is not ready. We are a hundred billion dollars less than we were 2011 when sequestration began and the world has changed dramatically. I can't tell you my disappointment to hear that the chairman of the appropriations committee, I don't know if my colleague knows, said that he's going to vote against it using some rationale that they're increasing by some $7 billion. That's insane. That is not only insane, it's irresponsible and most importantly, it's out of touch. I say to my colleagues, to the chairman of the subcommittee take you are out of touch with what's going on in the world in the United States military. You better get in touch.

Mr. GRAHAM:

I would just add that anybody who doesn't believe that there's an emergency in the United States military is not listening to the United States military and you have not been following the consequences of what we've done over the last five, six years in terms of cuts to the military.

Over the last seven or eight years, we've cut $1 trillion out of the United States military. We're on track to have the smallest Army since 1940, the smallest Navy since 1915, the smallest Air Force in modern times. We're on track to spend half of what we normally spend in time of war. Normally we spend about 4.5% G.D.P. to defend this nation. We're on track to spend 2.3% of G.D.P. This in my view is an emergency.

I want you to go back home and explain to those who are busting their ass to fight this war, who can't fly equipment because it's too dangerous, who are cannibalizing planes to keep some planes in the air, who are stretched so thin that it's creating high risk.

Here's what the General of the Army said, the Chief of Staff of the Army, “I characterize us at this current state at high military risk.” So this is the Chief of Staff of the Army telling you, all of us, that the Army is in a high state of risk because of budget cuts. This $18 billion will restore money that has been taken out, that will have a beneficial effect now and is absolutely essential.

It will give 15,000 more people in the Army, and if you're in the Army, you would like to have some more colleagues because you've been going back and forth, back and forth. So we need more people in the Army, not less. 3,000 more Marines. If anybody has born the burden of this war, it's the United States Marine Corps. Here's what I say. Let's hire more Marines. Let’s start listening to what is going on in the military.

The whole theory of this amendment is that we've let this deteriorate to the point that we have an emergency situation where we're putting our men and women's lives at risk because they don't have the equipment they need, the training opportunities they deserve to fight the war that we can't afford to lose, and you're going to vote no because you're worried about budget caps.

Oh, we love the military. Everybody loves the military. Well, your love doesn't help them. Your love doesn't buy a damn thing. If you love these men and women, you will adequately fund their needs. If you care about them and their families, you will adjust the budget so they can fight a war on our behalf.

We're up here arguing about everything, the state of politics in America makes me sick. Looks like one thing we could agree on, libertarians, vegetarians, Republicans and Democrats that those who are fighting this war deserve better than we're giving them. So I want to tell you when you come and vote against this amendment because you're worried about the budget caps, well the Budget Committee is not going to fight this war.

To my friends at Heritage Action, I agree with you a lot. You say this is a bad vote. Nobody at Heritage Action is going to go over to Afghanistan, Iraq or Syria or Libya to protect this country. You talk about a head in the sand Congress, you talk about people who are not listening, that are so worried about special interest groups and concepts that have absolutely no basis in reality, if you fully implement sequestration, all you've done is gut the military and some non-defense programs that really matter to us.

You haven't changed the debt at all. So don't go around telling people you're getting us to a balanced budget. You're not. The money is in entitlements and we're not doing a damn thing about it. Ryan-Murray added some money and I want to thank them but it wasn't enough. I want to thank the appropriators for adding $7 billion but it's not nearly enough. The $18 billion that is in this amendment goes to buy airplanes, 14 F-18's, 5 F-35’s, 2 F-35B's. $200 million to help the Israelis with their missile defense program.

What this buys is more people, more equipment, more training opportunities at a time that we need all of the above. It breaks the cap because we're in an emergency situation. These caps are strangling our ability to defend this nation.

I hate what we've done to the military. This is a small step forward. This is not nearly what we need but this $18 billion will provide some needed relief to the people who have been fighting this war for 15 years. So I hope and pray that you'll start listening to those that we've put in charge of our military and respond to their needs, and this is a small step in the right direction. And if we say no to this amendment, god help us all. And you own it. You own the state of high risk.

If you vote no, then as far as I'm concerned, you better never say I love the military anymore. Because if you really love them, you’d do something about it.