At a time when our nation faces unprecedented annual deficits and a crushing debt burden, it is clear we have tough spending choices to make. But what is equally clear is that those cuts must not jeopardize our national security. Next January, at the president’s insistence, we will be forced to make arbitrary and reckless cut to our nation’s defense.

Over the next few months, you may hear a great deal of talk about sequestration. Sequestration would arbitrarily cut the defense budget by an additional $55 billion in 2013. It would set in motion an additional $492 billion in cuts on top of the $487 billion already scheduled over the next ten years.

At the height of the Cold War, President John F. Kennedy recognized the need for a strong defense when he said, “I can imagine no more hazardous course than for the United States to gamble on its defense… ” Kennedy knew that in order to maintain our leadership in the free world and secure the peace, we must develop both our economic strength and our defenses. Both are necessary for sustained greatness. I trust that Americans still believe that the United States is the freest and greatest nation in the world.

These automatic, across-the-board defense cuts would reduce funding to programs next year with little or no regard to their strategic importance. Any consideration of a prudent prioritization of our defense requirements based on a threat-derived strategy would be gone. We would diminish the capabilities of our fighting force and ask our service members to take greater risks. Senior civilian and military defense officials use terms such as “unpalatable option,” “catastrophic damage,” “blind mindless formula,” and “irreversible damage” to describe defense sequestration. Regardless of one’s personal views on the priorities of government spending and the best way to reduce the federal deficit, very few could argue that sequestration is sound policy. It would irreversibly devastate our nation’s defense capacity, not to mention, permanently damage our economy.

The 2012 defense budget reductions combined with deeper cuts triggered by sequester will have second and third order effects which we are only beginning to understand. Defense companies and their suppliers, faced with decreased or delayed defense purchases, will have to consider whether continued defense work is still a viable pursuit. Many will not be able to accept the risk of uncertain defense funding and will have no choice but to abandon the defense sector for more stable work. Companies will close. Thousands of jobs will be lost. The aerospace and defense industries, which generate $215 billion in revenue, tens of billions in exports and employs millions of Americans, will face an uncertain future. A sequester would not only weaken our nation, but would derail any hope of an economic recovery.

Last month the House passed a spending bill that would have halted the defense cuts by finding savings elsewhere in the budget. For example, it would have eliminated waste in the food stamps program and defunded a slush fund in ObamaCare. Unfortunately, the Democrat-controlled Senate has refused to debate our bill.

While governing in a divided Congress is not easy, we must overcome our differences to protect our national defense. We must agree on sensible ways to reduce spending and encourage economic growth while not compromising our national security in the process.