Pentagon officials appear before budget panel as Iran war rages on | Face the Nation

0:00 before the subcommittee today.

0:02 I want to first acknowledge the extraordinary

0:04 demands we place on all our volunteer force and the military families who bear

0:09 the weight of service alongside their loved ones.

0:13 Quality of life and care for our service members and their families are central

0:17 to our mission to continue to ensure the finest fighting force in human history.

0:23 We owe everything to their sacrifice and send

0:26 our thanks that they have answered the call to serve.

0:30 This hearing addresses issues that are deeply interconnected

0:33 and collectively define the national security challenge of our time.

0:37 Let me begin with the budget.

0:39 We want to be good partners with the department to ensure

0:42 that our men and women in uniform have every resource they need.

0:46 But I have serious concerns about

0:48 how this bifurcated budget splits discretionary

0:51 and mandatory funding and some of the on some of our highest priority programs.

0:57 We have significant gaps in needs for our warfighters that we had to address

1:01 in the FY26 appropriations process because

1:04 of the way mandatory was requested and enacted.

1:08 The subcommittee needs to understand how the resources requested

1:12 in this budget translates into real

1:14 measurable improvements in warfighting capability.

1:18 We also need to understand the consequences of this funding approach.

1:22 We owe that level of accountability to the American taxpayers.

1:26 Next on readiness.

1:28 The picture demands our honest attention.

1:30 Across the multiple domains including munitions,

1:33 shipbuilding, innovation, and aviation,

1:35 questions persist about whether we are building

1:38 the depth and reliance required for a high-end conflict.

1:43 We have made progress in some areas.

1:44 I want to acknowledge the department's efforts to address these questions.

1:48 However, progress is not the same as capability in delivering

1:52 and capability delivery is what we need this moment demands.

1:57 Finally, that uh, brings me to the threat environment we cur- currently face.

2:04 The world has grown more dangerous,

2:06 more complex, and more interconnected in its risks.

2:10 China is modernizing its military at a pace and scale that is alarming.

2:15 Russia continues to wage a brutal war of aggression,

2:18 and while Iran and their proxies have been dealt a severe blow,

2:22 they remain a threat.

2:25 Threats to Taiwan, Ukraine, NATO, Israel, our partners in the Gulf,

2:30 and our allies across the globe are not abstract concerns.

2:35 They are tests of America's credibility and resolve.

2:38 This subcommittee believes deeply in the power of deterrence,

2:42 but deterrence must be credible, and credibility must be funded.

2:46 Finally, Mr.

2:47 Secretary, both you and your deputy must

2:49 be commended for your commitment to reforming,

2:53 modernizing, and prioritizing innovation at the department.

2:57 I've been here a long time.

2:59 I've watched administrations come and go,

3:02 and I promise you that there are bureaucrats who are trying to wait you out.

3:06 You must demand accountability at every level of your organization

3:09 to ensure that the change you have demanded is taking place.

3:14 Your call to move more quickly, inject competition,

3:17 allow new entrants into to participate

3:20 requires rigorous and persistent oversight.

3:23 Otherwise, the forces in the Pentagon will simply snap back to the status quo,

3:28 which does not serve our warfighters or the United States taxpayer.

3:32 Again, thank you for being here.

3:34 The members of this subcommittee take our oversight responsibilities seriously,

3:39 and we believe the American people

3:40 deserve straight answers on these consequential questions.

3:44 I look forward to an honest conversation

3:46 on how we are matching resources to priorities,

3:49 and honoring our commitments to meet the moment.

3:52 Now, I recognize the distinguished ranking member, Mrs.

3:55 McCollum, for her opening remarks.

3:57 Thank you, Mr.

3:58 Chairman.

3:58 Uh thank you for your courtesy of extending

4:00 this, and thank you for your statement.

4:03 We have a lot to discuss.

4:04 Historical high budget requests, the cost of the war in Iran.

4:08 Mr.

4:08 Secretary, I appreciate this year that you

4:10 opened up a dialogue with Chairman Calvert,

4:12 myself, and with our authorizing Senate colleagues.

4:16 When we last met, we asked for information to help

4:18 us determine what the department needs to ensure our national security.

4:23 We are still waiting for the information.

4:25 We've asked several times for a complete update on munition levels,

4:29 and it has not been provided.

4:31 This lacking of delivering timely information

4:33 for the committee is appearing to become a pattern.

4:36 We've requested briefings on the status of the funds appropriated for Ukraine.

4:40 That took 6 months for us to be adequately briefed.

4:44 The reconciliation bill, which was enacted on July 4th of last year,

4:48 we still need the details of how the funds were allocated,

4:52 and that were not provided to us until a 10-month wait.

4:56 10 months we waited for that.

4:58 Details have been provided uh on Golden Dome,

5:02 but only 185 billion dollars of the program,

5:06 and that's the initial research and development.

5:08 We still have no idea what the costs are

5:11 following on for procurement or maintenance of the program.

5:14 The department must do a better job of sharing the information with us.

5:18 With respect to the war in Iran, Mr.

5:20 Secretary, I saw your comments in the Armed Services Committee.

5:23 It was disappointing that you referred to members of both parties as defeatists.

5:27 I know you won't bring personalities into this this at this hearing,

5:32 and I will not questionize your patriotism, nor will you question mine.

5:37 But the cost of this war continues to rise as forces remain in the region.

5:41 The Appropriations Committee has a fiduciary

5:43 responsibility to the American people.

5:45 So, we will ask serious questions that need to be answered,

5:48 and that's our constitutional duty.

5:51 Chairman Calvert and I have asked for a breakout

5:53 of funding needs for Operation Epic Fury.

5:55 We know need to know the impact of what

5:57 it's having on the services executing missions beyond the war.

6:02 The department notified us that the standard fuel price

6:06 for the services has increased from $154 to $195 a barrel.

6:13 That's more we have to pay for fuel,

6:16 then there's less money available for training

6:18 and exercise that the services need to perform.

6:20 And the department does not have enough general

6:23 transport authority to cover these activities without a supplemental.

6:26 We must understand the department what it will do if

6:30 a supplemental is not sent to the hill or enacted.

6:32 Now, for the 25, excuse me, the 2027 request.

6:37 The baseline budget the Department of Defense requests

6:40 over $200 million over last year's enacted level.

6:43 When combined with the mandatory

6:45 funding for defense requests throughout reconciliation,

6:48 that's an increase of $400 billion, and that includes military construction.

6:53 Together, that's nearly 44% increase in defense spending over last year.

6:59 And the president proposes a domestic investment cut of $75 billion or 10%.

7:05 These cuts will will have an impact on our national security in many ways,

7:09 particularly costs to education.

7:12 The primary concern of the defense

7:14 budget is that the administration split between

7:17 discretionary funding and the appropriations control

7:21 mandatory funding that we do not control.

7:24 Mr.

7:24 Secretary, the administration's taking an enormous risk

7:27 by asking for $350 billion in priorities through reconciliation.

7:31 As we told you in our last meeting,

7:33 reconciliation is not the best way to fund the department.

7:36 Last year reconciliation created broken glass,

7:40 funding holes for vital programs that the appropriators had to fix.

7:44 And that's why we need the information in a timely fashion.

7:47 Most of your mandatory funding requests

7:49 for are for what you call presidential priorities,

7:52 Golden Dome, drone dominance, munitions, the defense industrial base.

7:57 What the administration submitted to us

7:59 for these programs was a 28-page document.

8:03 And that's not enough to properly explain $350 billion in in funding.

8:08 These programs will not be completed in one fiscal year,

8:11 and they will have tails.

8:13 That will put our department and our committee

8:15 in a very difficult situation next Congress.

8:18 Finally, as the chair did,

8:20 I want to take this opportunity to thank all of our service members,

8:23 active duty, National Guard, and Reserve components.

8:25 They serve with honor and distinction.

8:27 And I want to especially acknowledge those who have served in harm's way,

8:31 including those who have fallen and who

8:32 have been injured in Operation Epic Fury.

8:35 Their families need to know that we will never forget them,

8:39 and that what they have earned during gratitude and support.

8:42 Gentlemen, I look forward to your testimony.

8:43 Mr.

8:44 Chair, I yield back.

8:45 Thank you, Ms.

8:46 McCollum.

8:46 Before we hear from our witness,

8:48 I'd like to recognize the distinguished chairman of the full committee,

8:51 my good friend Chairman Tom Cole, for any opening comments.

8:55 Thank you, Chairman Calvert, Ranking Member McCollum,

8:58 my good friend Ranking Member Rosa DeLauro, and all the members here.

9:01 And welcome Mr.

9:03 Secretary and General Keane to the committee, and we appreciate all of you.

9:08 And certainly you as well, Under Secretary.

9:09 First, I didn't mean to mean to leave you out there.

9:12 I join Chairman Calvert and members of the subcommittee by saying at the outset

9:17 of this hearing the men and women

9:18 of our armed forces are the finest in the world.

9:21 They deserve our full support and our commitment to giving them the resources

9:25 they need that will keep them ready for the fights of today and tomorrow.

9:30 Without hesitation, I recognize that a strong, agile,

9:33 and effectively funded defense is not a mere priority, it is a necessity.

9:38 The current threat environment facing the United States is as serious

9:42 and as layered as anything I have witnessed during my time in Congress.

9:46 The convergence of challenges from China, Russia, North Korea,

9:50 and Iran demands that we all work together with a level of seriousness

9:55 and urgency that frankly has not always

9:57 characterized our defense debates in recent years.

10:00 On the budget, I firmly believe that adequate

10:03 and stable defense funding is a national imperative.

10:07 And yet funding alone is not enough.

10:09 Every dollar must reflect clear priorities,

10:12 operational effectiveness, and strategic urgency.

10:15 The subcommittee has a responsibility to ask hard questions about priorities,

10:20 program performances,

10:21 and whether departments acquisition process uh processes are keeping pace

10:26 with the speed uh at which our adversaries are moving.

10:30 To that end, I certainly associate myself with Chairman Calvert's

10:34 concern about a bifurcated funding of the Department of Defense.

10:38 Uh we have questions on the assumption

10:40 of mandatory funding in the Department's request.

10:44 Uh we need you to be a partner with us on this front.

10:46 Transparency and communication are critical to ensuring that we are

10:50 aligned as closely as we can be with your needs.

10:54 Uh and frankly, I do worry in the future.

10:56 I hope you address this in your remarks.

10:58 Uh this is a second reconciliation package for defense.

11:02 Uh and that creates cliffs for this committee in the future.

11:05 At some point, that funding disappears,

11:07 and we would have a massive uh increase in discretionary funding to sustain it.

11:12 So, how we do that going forward,

11:15 when we do that, is a major concern for this committee,

11:18 certainly for me personally.

11:20 I also want to speak directly about the issue of our allies and partners.

11:23 American power is most effective when it's exercised in concert

11:28 with like-minded nations who share our interests and our values.

11:31 As we look back on 250 years of our exceptional history,

11:36 the truth of that statement is apparent over and over.

11:40 From those who stood by us in our fight for independence

11:43 to the shared mission against evil during World War II,

11:48 tyranny falls when free nations stand together.

11:52 America first has never meant America alone.

11:55 American strength is not diminished when allies shoulder their share,

11:59 it's multiplied and we must continue to sharpen our strategic advantages.

12:04 And I commend you for working to make

12:06 sure that our partners are beginning to step forward.

12:10 NATO remains a critical pillar of collective

12:13 defense while our alliances across the Indo-Pacific

12:17 are indispensable to building a credible

12:19 deterrent against rising aggression in that region.

12:23 I'm interested today in hearing how this budget

12:25 strengthens those partnerships and how the department's

12:28 working to ensure that our allies are investing

12:31 at levels commensurate with the threats that they, as well as we, face together.

12:36 The bottom line is simple.

12:38 We always hope for peace while maintaining the strength to defend it.

12:41 We're committed to ensuring our military remains unmatched,

12:45 our adversaries deterred, and the American people protected.

12:49 Secretary Hexept and General Klein, we look forward to your candid dialogue.

12:53 The American people are counting on us to get this right.

12:57 I look forward to being a partner with you in that effort.

13:00 Again, I thank you for being here today and I

13:02 thank you all for your distinguished service to our country.

13:04 With that, Mr.

13:05 Chairman, I yield back.

13:06 Thank you, Mr.

13:06 Chairman.

13:07 I would like to turn now to the ranking member of the full committee, Mr.

13:10 Lowro, for any opening comments.

13:14 Thank you very much, Chairman Calvert and ranking member McCollum,

13:17 and uh good to be with you,

13:19 Chairman Cole, and Secretary Hexept and General Cain,

13:23 and Under Secretary Hurst, welcome to the committee.

13:26 Um the the president is requesting one and a half

13:29 trillion dollars in defense funding for the coming fiscal year.

13:33 1.5 trillion dollars is an extraordinary sum of money.

13:38 Congress and the American people have concerns about

13:41 what you plan to do with this money.

13:43 In fact, we have concerns about what you are doing with the more than

13:47 one trillion dollars you already have

13:50 from last year's appropriations and reconciliations uh bills.

13:55 How much will the president's quote skirmish in CENTCOM cost?

13:59 I know at a recent hearing 25 billion dollars was cited,

14:03 but we don't know uh what that includes or for what time period.

14:07 This was only supposed to last six weeks.

14:11 We have thus far been unable to get any

14:13 reliable information as to the true cost of this war.

14:21 The current ceasefire is tenuous at best with attacks

14:25 on Gulf nations happening just over the weekend.

14:28 The president tweeted he will not support the latest communication uh from Iran,

14:34 uh which we might agree with if we knew what was in it.

14:37 But there has been a consistent lack of transparency since this war began.

14:43 Media reports suggest there is intelligence that indicates Iran

14:47 can survive for months at the current uh standoff,

14:51 which means the cost of deployment

14:53 of 50,000 service personnel with their equipment will

14:57 only increase as every additional day this war

15:01 goes on brings with it additional costs.

15:05 This administration has not presented Congress

15:08 with any kind of clear or coherent strategy.

15:12 Week to week, day to day, hour to hour, the rationale shifts,

15:17 the objectives change, the end game is ill-defined when it is defined at all.

15:23 If the administration intends to ask Congress

15:26 for supplemental funding for the Iran war,

15:29 then you need to come back to Congress and testify

15:32 on that request specifically so that we and the American

15:36 people can fully understand what this administration has gotten us

15:41 into and how it plans to get us out of it.

15:45 Uh the question must be answered at the end of this crisis.

15:49 What have we accomplished and at what cost?

15:52 And before you come to the Congress for additional emergency funding,

15:56 we need information.

15:58 Has the department or any of the services

16:00 utilized mandatory funding for operational activities uh in CENTCOM?

16:05 If so, how much and from what accounts?

16:08 Uh if you can provide us with that breakout, it would be enormously helpful.

16:12 And again, what is the department's estimate of the full

16:15 cost of the operation against Iran uh to date?

16:19 Um uh the the [clears throat] $1 trillion allocated for fiscal year 2026,

16:28 $1.5 trillion requested uh for fiscal year 2027,

16:32 and possibly $25 billion for an upcoming supplemental,

16:37 all as the total debt in the United

16:40 States has reached 100% of gross domestic product.

16:45 In other words, the national debt is now larger than the US economy

16:50 and about twice the historic average according

16:53 to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.

16:57 The defense budget includes requested funding for the expanded

17:01 Golden Dome for America at $185 billion,

17:06 though those budget numbers are tenuous.

17:08 A new golden fleet in which three ships are estimated

17:13 to cost $43 billion and billions for private equity ventures,

17:18 which do not have well-defined processes or sufficient transparency.

17:23 With gas prices and inflation numbers increasing,

17:26 the American people just want to afford the basic necessities for everyday life.

17:32 But this administration is not doing anything

17:35 to help them with the cost of living crisis.

17:39 In fact, the administration is making the problem worse by proposing

17:43 dramatic cuts across the board

17:46 to domestic programs that support American families.

17:49 We have the most powerful military in the history of humankind.

17:55 I am extraordinarily grateful, as my other colleagues have pointed out,

17:59 to the men and women of our armed

18:01 services who sacrifice everything to keep us safe.

18:06 Their devotion to duty exact is exemplary.

18:10 And it must be matched by the seriousness and the sobriety

18:14 of those at the very top of the chain of command.

18:18 And right now, I worry if that standard is being met.

18:22 Look forward to your testimonies today and hearing

18:25 the answers to this committee's questions shortly.

18:29 Thank you, Mr.

18:29 Chairman, and I yield back.

18:31 Thank the ranking member.

18:32 We'll now begin witness testimony.

18:33 Gentlemen, without objection,

18:34 your full written testimony will be placed in the record.

18:37 Secretary Hexaf, we'll begin with you for a brief summary of your remarks.

18:42 Well, thank you, Mr.

18:43 Chairman, ranking member.

18:46 Distinguished members of the committee,

18:47 I thank you for the opportunity to testify in full support of President

18:50 Trump's historic 1.5 trillion fiscal year 2027 budget for the Department of War.

18:57 The President's budget request reflects the urgency of the moment,

19:01 as was mentioned by many.

19:03 Addressing both the deferment of long-standing problems,

19:07 as well as positioning our forces for the current and future fight.

19:12 I'm honored to appear alongside General Dan Cain,

19:14 Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,

19:15 and Jay Hurst, our Chief Financial Officer.

19:19 And I'd like to start by thanking

19:20 this committee and Congress for your partnership

19:24 in securing the investments needed for a stronger and more secure America.

19:29 A nation's ability to build, to innovate,

19:32 and to support the critical needs of its warfighters at speed

19:35 and at scale is the foundation upon which its survival rests.

19:41 However, upon taking office on January 20th of 2025,

19:44 President Trump inherited a defense industrial base that had

19:48 been hollowed out by years of America Last policies,

19:53 resulting in a diminished capability and capacity to project strength.

19:57 Offshoring, outsourcing, cost overruns, degraded capabilities.

20:04 Under the leadership of President Trump, our builder-in-chief,

20:08 we are reversing this systemic decay and putting

20:10 our defense industrial base back on a wartime footing.

20:14 Urgency informs everything we do at this department.

20:18 We are rebuilding a military that the American people can be proud of.

20:22 One that instills nothing less than the unrelenting

20:25 fear in our adversaries and confidence in our allies.

20:29 We fight to win in every scenario.

20:33 The $1.5 trillion budget request put forward

20:36 by the President will build upon the historic $1 trillion

20:39 FY26 topline and will continue to reverse the four

20:43 years of underinvestment and mismanagement of the Biden administration.

20:48 The $1.5 trillion budget will ensure the United

20:51 States continues to maintain the world's most

20:53 powerful and capable military as we grapple

20:56 with a complex threat environment across multiple theaters.

21:00 Not to mention the budget also includes a historic troop pay increase,

21:05 uh building on the pay increases this committee has given,

21:08 and the budget eliminates all poor or failing barracks.

21:12 Quality of life for our troops is front and center in this budget.

21:17 By supercharging our industrial capacity

21:20 and transforming how the department does business,

21:22 we are restoring American commercial dominance at a pace unseen in generations,

21:28 transforming the defense industrial base from the broken,

21:31 slow-moving systems of the past.

21:34 We have flipped the Pentagon acquisition process

21:36 from a bureaucratic model to a business model,

21:39 decisively moving from an acquisition

21:41 environment paralyzed by bureaucratic red tape

21:44 into an outcomes-driven organization focused

21:47 on delivering the most for taxpayer dollars.

21:50 And Mr.

21:50 Chairman, you're right,

21:51 it's a war of attrition against the Pentagon bureaucracy every single day,

21:54 and we intend to win it.

21:56 Over the past year, through historic multi-year procurement agreements,

22:01 smart business deals, we have sent ambiguous demand signals to our industry

22:05 partners to build more and build faster.

22:09 The result has been a surge, a revitalization of our great American factories,

22:14 and massive reinvestment in the skilled American workers

22:17 who serve as the industrial muscle behind our warriors.

22:22 Let me briefly provide you with some concrete,

22:24 high-level metrics of what we've accomplished over the last few months.

22:28 These are announced new facilities

22:30 and investments to support American warfighters.

22:32 The department has helped stimulate more than

22:34 250 private investment deals in 39 states,

22:38 in 180 cities, in 150 different companies, worth more than $50 billion.

22:44 This has resulted in 280 new and expanded facilities,

22:49 more than 18 million new square feet of American manufacturing,

22:52 and more than 70,000 new American jobs.

22:56 These $50 billion in defense investments in new plants,

23:01 assembly lines, and factories are private investments, not taxpayer dollars.

23:07 By completely transforming our department's business model,

23:10 American companies are investing in America with their own capital.

23:14 A historic demonstration of American manufacturing and defense revitalization,

23:19 all with their money, not Uncle Sam's.

23:22 This has never been done before and is long

23:25 overdue from a bureaucratic model to a business model.

23:29 These investments equal great things for America,

23:32 American families and American workers,

23:34 and help us ensure our warfighters can defend this great country.

23:38 Together with the help of the policy

23:40 updates and appropriations passed by Congress,

23:43 President Trump's War Department has begun to turn the lights back

23:46 on in manufacturing towns across this country

23:49 to forge a lethal arsenal of freedom.

23:53 Where our critical supply chains are threatened,

23:55 the Department of War has acted decisively to inject capital,

23:58 stimulate production, and prevent adversarial exploitation.

24:02 We are firing up the American economic engine

24:05 at every level of the defense industrial base.

24:08 Every policy we pursue, every budgetary item we request,

24:12 serves to ensure that this department

24:13 remains laser-focused on increasing lethality and survivability

24:17 of our fighting force from the front lines to the factory floors.

24:21 This is, admittedly, a historic budget.

24:25 It is a fiscally responsible budget, and it is a warfighter budget.

24:31 Under President Trump, we are restoring the unbreakable might of American

24:35 manufacturing that we will need for generations.

24:37 We are providing for our warfighters,

24:39 and we are putting the people and interests of this country first.

24:44 May almighty God continue to watch over all of our troops,

24:48 and may we honor the legacy of those brave Americans that we've lost.

24:51 That is our sacred mission that we will continue to execute on.

24:56 Thank you again to this committee for your partnership

24:58 and we look forward to answering your questions.

25:00 Thank you.

25:01 Thank you, Mr.

25:02 Secretary.

25:02 General Keane, you're now recognized for your remarks.

25:05 Chairman Calvert, Ranking Member McCollum,

25:07 Chairman Cole, Ranking Member DeLauro,

25:09 thank you for having me and all the members of the committee,

25:11 thank you for having me.

25:13 I'm honored here today to testify alongside the Honorable

25:17 Pete Hegseth and the Honorable Jay Hurst on the President's

25:20 fiscal year 2027 budget and I'm grateful for the opportunity

25:24 to speak about the foundations of America's strength,

25:28 the 2.8 million members of our joint force.

25:31 I am continually inspired by the soldiers,

25:34 sailors, airmen, marines, guardians, coast guardsmen, guardsmen,

25:38 and civilians standing the watch for our nation

25:41 supported each and every day by their families.

25:44 They could have chosen anything in their path of service,

25:47 but they chose to serve our great country

25:49 and meet our nation's challenge with challenges with courage,

25:53 tenacity, and grit that's keeping our nation strong and safe.

25:57 I would also like to express my deep gratitude for the 40

26:01 members of the joint force who we've lost in operations,

26:05 combat, and training during my time as chairman,

26:08 including 14 who passed during Operation Epic Fury and our most recent loss,

26:14 First Lieutenant Key, who valiantly gave his life trying to save

26:18 a teammate while deployed on a temporary

26:20 duty assignment in Africa and we continue to hold hope for his teammate.

26:25 The Secretary and I are deeply grateful for each of them

26:28 and their families and their names will never be forgotten.

26:31 As chairman, my duty is to ensure

26:33 civilian leadership has a comprehensive range of options,

26:37 military options, alongside the associated risk to make

26:41 the nation's hardest and most complex decisions.

26:44 I owe the President, the Secretary,

26:47 and the Congress the truth at every turn and my blueprint

26:49 for this approach has always been General George C.

26:53 Marshall.

26:54 His firm commitment to civilian control

26:56 and a non-partisan military remains my constant standard,

27:00 and I strive to follow his example by working with each of you

27:05 to and providing clear and candid non-partisan military advice and to present

27:10 this committee with the clearest possible

27:12 assessment of operational risk and readiness

27:16 and executability within the unclassified environment

27:20 that we find ourselves in today.

27:22 As the chairman said, we're operating in a delicate and dangerous time.

27:26 Global risk is scaling, and the complexities of the modern

27:30 battlefield demand America's constant adaptation and innovation.

27:36 America's joint force is operational at its core,

27:40 purpose-built for the realities of a complex world, we're organized, trained,

27:45 and equipped to execute the most demanding

27:48 missions across the globe with unrivaled precision.

27:52 And over the last year,

27:54 our warfighters have consistently demonstrated exactly what

27:58 it means to be the most capable,

28:00 adaptable, and professional military on Earth.

28:04 We are able to accomplish this highly

28:07 complicated work because we draw from a deep,

28:10 enduring reservoir of training, professionalism, and commitment.

28:15 Our ops tempo is high,

28:17 but we're designed to sustain it, rebuilding our strength continuously.

28:22 We rebuild readiness every day, we train every day,

28:26 we learn and sharpen our edge every day.

28:28 And driving this pace and of change

28:32 and maintaining our superiority requires timely, predictable,

28:36 and sustained investment in a partnership

28:38 with this committee and the broader Congress,

28:41 and I appreciate that.

28:43 And the resources that we'll discuss today

28:46 are critical to modernizing the joint force

28:49 and ensuring that if whatever threats emerge

28:52 or when called upon, our nation can win.

28:55 The president's budget supports the department's goals of recharging the defense

28:59 industrial base and the national industrial

29:02 base while enhancing our military readiness.

29:05 We will continue to ensure our warfighters are properly armed,

29:09 globally integrated, and ready while always taking care of our most

29:14 precious thing and that is our people.

29:16 And while advancing the hardware and technology essential to fight,

29:20 it's the character and competence of our people,

29:23 particularly the 1.8 million members of our enlisted force,

29:27 who make us proud every day and they're represented

29:30 today by the senior enlisted advisor to the chairman,

29:33 United States Navy SEAL Dave Isem, sitting behind me.

29:37 While we face dynamic and dangerous times,

29:40 I have absolute trust and confidence in our people who

29:44 every day execute the most challenging missions with quiet professionalism.

29:50 And coupled with the American spirit to outthink,

29:53 outcompete, and relentlessly innovate, we will maintain our decisive edge,

29:59 but doing so requires your continued partnership.

30:02 It is also graduation season where we welcome

30:05 a whole bunch of new members to the joint force,

30:09 to include members like Second Lieutenant Archie Dennis, United States Army,

30:13 who along with his Citadel classmates in South Carolina,

30:17 joined the joint force this weekend.

30:19 And I welcome he and all the other new graduates to the joint force.

30:24 As I close, I humbly ask that we remember right

30:26 now our deployed teammates out there doing our nation's work,

30:30 going out into the darkness to do the things that we ask them to do.

30:34 And I ask, as always,

30:36 that we remember not just the 40 fallen that I mentioned earlier,

30:40 but all of our nation's fallen and their families who soldier on.

30:44 Thank you and I also look forward to your questions.

30:47 Thank you.

30:47 I want to ensure each member has a chance to ask questions,

30:50 so everyone will have 5 minutes for their remarks.

30:53 I'll begin by recognizing myself for 5 minutes.

30:56 Secretary Hixson For decades, Congress and the department has

31:00 sought acquisition reform and innovating technologies.

31:03 It's only since FY24 that the level

31:06 of investment started to catch up with the rhetoric.

31:09 The FY27 budget request includes over

31:12 950 million for the Defense Innovation Unit,

31:16 54.6 billion for the Defense Autonomous Warfare Group,

31:20 580 million for the Joint Interagency Task Force 401,

31:25 and for the for the counter small UAS.

31:28 And I believe these investments will deliver overdue capability.

31:33 And this subcommittee will continue to work with you to ensure success.

31:37 I also note there's only 100 million

31:39 for the accelerate the procurement and fielding of innovative technologies.

31:43 That's surprisingly low given AFWERX's success.

31:47 The subcommittee will continue to support AFWERX as we have in the past.

31:51 I invite you to join me at the AFWERX Day on the Hill

31:54 July 21st to see firsthand how

31:56 AFWERX is delivering capabilities to the warfighter.

32:00 Consistent with the desire for injecting innovation at scale,

32:04 for decades there's been increasing demand for increasing resilience

32:09 in the industrial base and more specifically the supply chain.

32:13 The FY27 budget request includes over 20.2 billion for the Office

32:17 of Strategic Capital and 30.4 billion for the Defense Production Act.

32:22 As you're aware, we're working closely with the Industrial

32:24 Base Policy Team on the Silver Reserve Manufacturing

32:27 Network to ensure the department can qualify and certify

32:31 second and alternate sources to maximize American manufacturing.

32:36 With exception of DIU and the Joint Interagency Task Force 401,

32:41 most of the investments listed are in mandatory funding.

32:45 What was the strategy to heavily rely

32:48 on the mandatory funding sector in this budget?

32:53 Well, thank you for the question, Mr.

32:54 Chairman.

32:54 And and I would um first I would thank

32:58 you and this committee for your efforts on acquisition reform,

33:01 many of which were had not been embraced by the department before.

33:05 And uh a lot of templates on the table that were

33:08 there for us to fall in and run fast with.

33:10 And so, speed, scale, cutting red tape, uh reducing requirements where we can,

33:16 looking at things like DIU, uh replicator, now the dog,

33:20 um and the Defense Autonomous Working Warfare Group.

33:23 Uh all of those are were born of collaboration with the committee and efforts

33:28 of now reformers we have in the department who are ready to run with it.

33:31 Um as it pertains to the to the budget, I think there's a a reality in this town

33:37 of how what can get done and how it gets done.

33:40 And in a perfect world, everything would get done in regular order.

33:43 Uh it and with a $1.5 trillion top line,

33:46 but there are a lot of challenges and dynamics,

33:48 um some of which I don't control.

33:50 And ultimately, we look forward to working

33:52 with the committee to ensuring however it shakes out,

33:55 um that it's with full transparency

33:57 with you and maximizing options for the department.

34:00 And I think uh the reconciliation last year was a was a new vehicle,

34:05 so it took some time, especially cuz we're doing new things,

34:08 Office of Strategic Capital, different avenues.

34:11 So, figuring out how to deploy that uh took longer than we'd like,

34:14 uh but we're committed to ensuring this year

34:16 uh with that as a vehicle, part of it,

34:18 that we do it in concert with you to ensure the most important things,

34:22 whether they're in that or or in regular order, are included in the budget.

34:34 Understand the the for flexibility.

34:36 I you know, I understand why you're we're breaking this up in order

34:41 to into chunks that's I guess more digestible to some degree politically.

34:46 But um I would hope we can get a supplemental bill here soon.

34:52 Uh obviously that we know that of the munitions

34:55 issue and we know of the cost of this conflict.

35:00 And we know the cost of other conflicts.

35:02 And so we need to repay those O&M accounts that are going

35:06 to be used I suspect in order to pay for this ongoing operation.

35:09 So uh any idea when we're going to get this supplemental?

35:14 Uh we're well aware of all those dynamics.

35:18 I think first of all uh the munitions

35:20 issue issue has been foolishly uh and unhelpfully overstated.

35:23 We're we we know exactly what we have.

35:25 We have plenty of what we need and the reason we are um accelerating a lot

35:30 of this is because the department's been static

35:32 in how it does this kind of business.

35:33 Not to mention the amount that's was given to Ukraine for years and years.

35:37 So we are getting after changing that dynamic so

35:40 that we're not getting a hundred more of something,

35:43 but companies are investing so there's new plants so you're getting 2X,

35:47 3X, 4X of those munition in future years because that's what we need,

35:51 that's what the our allies and partners through FMS require,

35:54 and we just haven't been delivering it.

35:56 So we're we're in we're in good shape on that front.

35:58 Whatever we think we need uh we will submit.

36:01 But I I'll say even in the conduct of the conflict

36:04 working with the chairman and Admiral Cooper uh ensuring that any munitions

36:08 we're using where we know what we're trading off of to preserve

36:10 capabilities so we have maximum optionality across the globe, which we do.

36:16 Again, though it'd be helpful to get the supplemental sooner

36:18 rather than later for we can get to work on it.

36:20 Uh and I'll recognize Ms.

36:21 McCollum for her question.

36:24 Thank you, Mr.

36:24 Chair.

36:25 Um Mr.

36:26 Secretary, the House Armed Services oversight hearing, Mr.

36:29 Hurst uh stated that the cost for the war

36:32 for op- Operation Epic Fury are at 25 billion.

36:36 Am I correct with with that number that you used at the hearing, Mr.

36:39 Hurst?

36:41 Yes, ma'am.

36:41 That was the cost at that time.

36:43 At that time.

36:44 Um I would request that you provide

36:46 the committee uh in writing the specifics of what

36:50 the department will be requesting in the supplemental

36:52 and the breakouts for the following costs.

36:55 We talked munitions and Mr.

36:57 Secretary, I think we'd have a more robust discussion

36:59 on that if we were in a classified setting,

37:01 but I respect what what what you shared with us.

37:05 But this is what I'd like.

37:07 Uh a breakout for military personnel, operational activities,

37:13 additional maintenance for deployed ships, munitions used,

37:19 equipment lost, and updated fuel costs.

37:23 Now, we need to know the funding required

37:25 to cover the damage to the US facilities,

37:28 and if there are any agreements from our regional allies,

37:31 we hear things in the press that would be

37:33 helping for any new facilities or improvements in CENTCOM.

37:38 Now, Mr.

37:38 Hurst, here's here's here's the rub.

37:41 We need that by June 11th.

37:43 We mark up our bill.

37:46 And some of these are not new asks,

37:48 but I thought I'd I'd drill down a bit just a little more specific for you.

37:53 Um so I know you're going to do your best.

37:57 I we'll take the homework assignment in pieces.

38:00 Anything you can provide would be great.

38:02 Now, under the War Powers Resolution,

38:04 the administration has 60 days to conclude activities

38:07 unless Congress has declared war or provided authorization.

38:11 Congress has not done that.

38:12 And I know there's different opinions and it changes from day

38:15 to day whether or not the War Powers clock is paused.

38:19 But this law states beyond May 2nd,

38:21 the administration needs congressional

38:23 authorization to continue military operations.

38:26 And the president just recently said yesterday that epic fury is not over.

38:31 Military operations have continued.

38:33 We have a naval blockade.

38:35 And both sides are exchanging fire.

38:38 They did so over the weekend.

38:40 Speaker Johnson, in my opinion,

38:41 should put an authorization on the floor this week.

38:44 But Mr.

38:44 Secretary, if Congress does not authorize,

38:48 if we don't authorize this to continue military operations against Iran,

38:53 you're going to have to have a plan put in place to draw down our troops,

38:58 to reset the region, to protect our assets.

39:01 Um and um I'm wondering, and that might be in a classified a situation,

39:06 but could you provide this committee with plan B?

39:08 Because if we go there, we're going to have to re-reset our budget

39:12 after June 11th if the War Powers Act,

39:16 in my opinion, should be involved and um it comes to Congress.

39:20 But we don't know what the outcome would be.

39:22 Do you have a plan B?

39:26 Uh ranking [clears throat] member, I would say we have a plan for all of that.

39:29 We have a plan to escalate if necessary.

39:32 We have a plan to uh retrograde if necessary.

39:35 We have a plan to shift assets.

39:37 Certainly in this setting, we wouldn't reveal what the next step may

39:40 be considering the gravity of of the mission

39:42 that the president's undertaking to ensure that Iran never has a nuclear bomb.

39:45 Well, Mr.

39:46 Secretary, as you know, we can be in receipt of that in a different situation.

39:50 And we would also like that by June 11th.

39:54 With that, I yield back.

39:58 Thank the gentle lady.

40:00 Mr.

40:00 Chairman.

40:01 Uh thank you very much, Mr.

40:02 Chairman.

40:03 Uh Mr.

40:03 Secretary, as I said in my opening remarks,

40:06 I have concerns about the use of reconciliation.

40:08 I don't have any concerns about the amounts

40:11 and uh the effort to restore the industrial base.

40:14 You're to be commended for that.

40:16 And frankly, I think we've underinvested for a long time.

40:18 So, I'm I'm happy to see a robust number.

40:21 I am worried about the ability

40:23 to sustain that number through the reconciliation process.

40:27 At some point, that money disappears.

40:29 Uh and we'll be So, give me some sense of how much

40:34 of this reconciliation money is one-time expense that you expect to either

40:38 invest use for procurement that may not you may not need

40:41 to do again for a long time or inject in the industrial base.

40:45 How much is for day-to-day operations that we would need,

40:50 frankly, to think of as a long-term recurring expense?

40:53 It's a good question, Mr.

40:54 Chairman.

40:54 And I'll I'll defer to Jay on on details,

40:57 but I would say a big Take for example the deals that are being cut

41:01 that will be funded here that ultimately look

41:03 at companies that make exquisite weapon systems for us,

41:06 and they say in exchange for a five-to-seven-year contract,

41:09 which committees like this have authorized for for us,

41:11 the authorizing committees,

41:13 uh not the appropriating committees, the authorizing committees,

41:15 and now because they have that clear demand signal,

41:19 they're able to invest in a new plant, and they're paying for it.

41:21 And that's what I talked about in my opening remarks.

41:23 So, they're building two or three new facilities,

41:25 but we're committed to paying for those munitions

41:27 for five to seven years from this budget.

41:29 And ultimately, but the nice part is

41:31 we're saving money because there's no inflation.

41:32 It's at the cost of it today even when we buy it seven years from now,

41:36 and that's why you're seeing a $331 billion in munitions as part of this budget.

41:41 There is a There's a rocket fuel component

41:43 to this given the underinvestment that exists inside this budget.

41:47 There will be some tail, obviously, and and as I acknowledged up front,

41:51 a higher top line from this department's perspective is always a welcome thing,

41:55 uh but the intention is not to get anyone stuck in a certain place,

41:58 but to address the needs of the moment, cut different deals,

42:01 create new dynamics where companies actually invest, so we have,

42:05 you know, this committee knows the exquisite munitions that we're going

42:09 to be using five to seven years from now, no matter what.

42:11 It's about time we look into the future the way we are with this budget,

42:15 but you have to fund that.

42:16 And so, I think that's that's a big chunk of of an increase that you see.

42:20 I mean, if you're investing in the shipbuilding industrial base,

42:23 the defense industrial base, um housing and barracks,

42:26 all of that increase troop pay.

42:30 We're looking at increasing the top line of the entire force by 50,000 troops.

42:34 That's a that's an investment into the future.

42:35 So, I would acknowledge that a lot of this does have follow-on cost,

42:39 uh but some of it is something we're going

42:41 to pay for now and benefit from the future.

42:43 But, Jay, I would defer to you.

42:45 Yeah, Mr.

42:45 Chairman, in this there's $113 billion

42:48 for investments in the defense industrial base.

42:50 I would characterize that as a one-time plus-up for catch-up.

42:53 Uh $35 billion for FSRM to fix all of our poor

42:57 and failing barracks and other facilities of the department.

42:59 And also some catch-up investments in AI and autonomy.

43:02 And so, if you look at what we're doing with mandatory,

43:04 probably about 200 billion of that is a one-time expense.

43:07 Uh we come down to 1.23 for our requested top line for FY28.

43:11 And so, we think we can sustain these investments

43:14 over the FYDP with discretionary dollars after this.

43:18 Well, that's reassuring.

43:19 And again, I don't have any disagreement

43:21 with the what you're trying to accomplish at all.

43:24 I would remind you that uh frankly,

43:27 the use of reconciliation depends on political

43:30 support in Congress that can be very transitory.

43:33 Uh so, it's a high-risk uh strategy

43:36 as opposed to building things into the baseline.

43:39 Uh but again, I'm supportive of what you're trying

43:42 to do in terms of recharging the industrial base.

43:44 I think it's long overdue.

43:46 Let me ask you a specific question.

43:48 Um uh and you may want to get back to me on this, I don't know,

43:51 but uh we've had some discussion over you know,

43:56 we lost one E-3 uh on the ground.

44:00 Thank goodness uh it looks like no crew lost.

44:03 Um this committee's been interested in investing in the E-7.

44:08 Uh Pentagon signed a contract for five

44:12 additional planes not in the Air Force budget.

44:16 Is there going to be a fix to that?

44:17 Are we Where are we at on thinking about the E-7?

44:23 I well aware of that dynamic.

44:25 I know our department had taken the position

44:27 that it was um airborne or other satellite

44:30 ISR that was probably going to be capable of a lot of that in the future,

44:33 but I think that mindset was indicative of of um of a mindset that we've shed,

44:40 which is the divest to invest mindset,

44:42 which was an austerity mindset that we're going

44:45 to get in continuing resolution after continuing resolution.

44:47 So, we got to get rid of these platforms in order to invest in these platforms,

44:50 and there are gaps that need to still be filled,

44:53 and there are systems that see it still need

44:54 to be funded that are used on the battlefield right now.

44:56 Say MQ-9s, A-10s, you name it.

45:00 Um I think this and the E-7 is one of those.

45:03 So, I I we've actually sent it a um a budget amendment to OMB to add that.

45:07 I think it has a future.

45:08 It has a it has a place on the battlefield,

45:10 and uh we'll get more information for you on that as well.

45:13 Well, I appreciate that, and I particularly though appreciate the mindset.

45:16 I think you're 100% right.

45:18 I've seen this over and over again about eliminating platforms

45:22 on the idea we would immediately use that money for new things,

45:25 and quite often it just simply didn't happen.

45:28 We lost the capability,

45:29 but we did not move forward with the investment that we needed.

45:33 So, uh again, thank you for uh rethinking that.

45:37 I've got a lot more questions, but so does the entire committee, Mr.

45:39 Chairman.

45:40 So, with that, I'll yield back.

45:42 I just want to make one quick comment

45:43 when you're talking about the fixing barracks and facilities.

45:46 I hope we also fix the property management systems throughout the department,

45:50 uh which is woefully needs attention.

45:54 With that, I recognize the ranking member.

45:57 Mr.

45:57 Wilson.

45:57 Thank you very much, Mr.

45:58 Chairman.

45:59 Uh Mr.

46:00 Secretary, the National Security Strategy says

46:02 American national power depends on strong industrial sector capable of meeting

46:07 both peacetime and wartime production demands.

46:10 And the National Defense Strategy directs DOD

46:12 to quote supercharge the defense industrial base.

46:16 Uh DOD's uh uh 2027 budget overview appears to use that same framing.

46:21 Yet uh your department's budget request cuts over $5

46:26 billion from the industrial base in the aviation sector alone,

46:32 effectively shutting down all current Army Aviation platforms.

46:38 Uh these are uh current production platforms the force relies on for lift,

46:42 for sustainability, disaster response, homeland missions, etc.

46:47 Uh how did the department arrive at the conclusion that reducing procurement

46:52 for these Army Aviation platforms strengthens

46:55 rather than weakens the aviation industrial base?

46:59 Well, I very much appreciate that question,

47:00 and I actually think it's something we're taking another look at.

47:03 Uh I think it's not that every aspect of There

47:06 are some very good things in the Army Transformation Initiative,

47:09 and there are some things that we've needed to get another look at.

47:12 And so I think you'll see a review of of of some of those things,

47:15 and we'll get back to you on that.

47:16 Of of the of the aviation sector?

47:18 Yes, ma'am.

47:19 Okay.

47:19 And what with that but was there an analysis

47:22 uh about the impact uh of the requested procurement reduction?

47:27 Did you all do an analysis of production lines, suppliers, workforce,

47:31 restart risk prior to the decision uh to cut the funds?

47:37 Well, we'll get that from the Army and get that to you.

47:39 I I I don't have it in front of me, but I I would imagine something was done.

47:42 very very much would love to see that before the subcommittee

47:45 marks up the appropriations bill uh uh uh coming up.

47:49 Let me just quickly um Can you provide the committee in writing the department's

47:55 assessment of the minimum sustaining production rate

47:59 for the Black Hawk and Chinook industrial base,

48:03 the supplier base risks associated with this budget request,

48:07 and the funded mitigation plan if production falls below those levels.

48:14 Can you provide us with that information?

48:16 I think that's critically important.

48:17 I think we should get that to you,

48:18 and I think those platforms are critical to the force right now,

48:21 and we need to make sure we're able to sustain them.

48:22 I think you made the point you all

48:24 had that industrial base readiness is a strategic issue.

48:27 It's what the national security strategy, you know,

48:31 recognizes, and I look forward to hearing, you know,

48:34 more about how cutting the billion dollars

48:36 in the in the base investment aligns with that shared goal.

48:40 Let me just a question to you, General Cain.

48:42 Despite the precipitous drop in procurement for Army Aviation platforms,

48:46 your budget it it request invests heavily in modernization.

48:51 I'm a believer in modernization.

48:52 I think that's necessary.

48:54 I support investing in future capability,

48:57 but Congress also has to understand the transition risk.

49:02 The department is asking us to accept reduced procurement of aircraft the force

49:08 uses today while relying on future systems that are not yet fielded.

49:14 And and General, from a joint force readiness perspective,

49:19 what is the department's plan to avoid a mobility lift sustainment

49:24 gap if current aviation capacity

49:28 declines faster than replacement capability arrives?

49:32 What are the decision points where the department would

49:35 revisit the reductions if future vertical lifts schedule slip,

49:39 if costs rise, or operational demand remains higher than expected?

49:45 Well, ranking member, I appreciate the question,

49:47 and any time we're looking at military options to our political leaders,

49:52 we we do bake in and can carefully consider that transitional

49:56 risk uh because it links back to risk to force,

50:00 our military forces, and and risk to missions.

50:03 And as we look forward over the life

50:05 cycle of this budget and beyond into the FYDP,

50:09 you know, we're always looking at the evolution of those operational plans,

50:14 and then the decision points along the way

50:17 to make sure that we can match the combat capability

50:21 and capacity required to achieve the desired effects

50:25 that are baked within those operational plans across the COCOMs.

50:30 And I commend the Army uh who's looking closely at the two

50:33 platforms that you're most interested through your line of questioning

50:38 and the work that Under Secretary Obadal has been doing to look

50:41 at rotary link rotary wing lift requirements as we move to the future.

50:46 But uh in the end, we have to have mobility on the battlefield.

50:49 Um it has to be survivable uh

50:52 in the in the conflicts and uh engagements that we'll have.

50:56 And so, we we remain very closely focused on those requirements.

51:00 Well, I I I I I appreciate that.

51:02 And my only concern is it is not whether modernization is important,

51:06 but I understand with some of those efforts that were

51:09 not We are looking uh for a future date.

51:12 Is next year?

51:13 The year after?

51:14 Uh so forth because it's it it's not been it's not been fielded.

51:18 Uh but what we need to take a look at, and I think you

51:21 understand this, is whether the department is

51:23 managing this transition uh in a responsible way.

51:27 And in my view, what we cannot afford

51:29 to do is to create a near-term aviation gap.

51:34 We weaken the supplier base,

51:36 and then ask the Congress to come back and rebuild that capability

51:41 and that capacity at a greater cost because when you destroy the infrastructure,

51:46 it's very very difficult to bring that back

51:48 and the skilled workforce that it takes to deal with that.

51:52 So, very clearly this information, and if you can supply this to our committee,

51:57 would be very very helpful in our moving forward.

52:00 I yield back, Mr.

52:00 Chairman.

52:01 Thank you, General Leiter.

52:01 Mr.

52:01 Womack.

52:04 Thank you, Mr.

52:05 Chairman.

52:06 You know, you thread a very difficult needle

52:12 in that and there's been a lot of comments made,

52:15 and I associate myself with a lot of these comments on the fact that here

52:19 we are trying to figure out a base budget at the same time of a supplemental,

52:24 and at the same time talking about reconciliation in order to be

52:27 able to meet the needs of the joint force going forward.

52:31 Uh and my friend, the ranking member of the full committee,

52:35 talks about capability gaps.

52:38 When you have to do it this way because

52:41 of the lack of certainty and the political dynamics around this dais,

52:46 and of course throughout Congress, there are going to be gaps in capabilities.

52:52 Is that correct, Mr.

52:52 Secretary?

52:54 I mean, we do everything we can to try to minimize

52:56 that by planning what could play off against something else,

52:59 but inevitably there are places where we have to make adjustments.

53:02 You're right, sir.

53:02 I want to get uh somewhat parochial here for just

53:06 a minute on the subject of our reserve component.

53:09 And this question would be for General Cain.

53:11 Last month, 22 adjutants general, all of those who command fighter units

53:16 in their state signed a letter to Congress

53:18 calling for multi-year procurement authority to buy

53:20 between 72 and 100 new fighters annually.

53:23 13 of 24 fighter units lack recapitalization plans.

53:28 On the Army side, all of our states suffer from a lack

53:30 of reimbursement for responding to the call of their communities.

53:34 Between fiscal 20 and fiscal 24,

53:36 over 71 million was paid by states to the guard,

53:40 but the guard never saw that reimbur- reimbursement.

53:43 As you may know, any non-federal entity reimbursing a federal

53:47 entity causes the funding to go to the Treasury.

53:49 And NGB never sees that reimbursement.

53:52 Our guard is paying to respond to a disaster out of O&M funds,

53:56 then having to pay more to maintain it.

53:59 As the primary combat reserve for our active force,

54:02 the guard continues to play an outsized role in the nation's defense.

54:06 In fact, General Northhouse recently said that our National Guardsmen are

54:10 fully integrated as part of the joint force in Operation Epic Fury.

54:14 So, here's my point.

54:15 The guard and reserve are being asked to do more.

54:18 Epic Fury, Midnight Hammer, border security missions, domestic deployments,

54:23 and the many all-hazard responses across the 54.

54:27 They are as much in the fight as the regular component.

54:33 So, what is the department's plan to ensure

54:36 that the guard and reserve are recapitalized,

54:38 maintained, and reimbursed at a pace consistent

54:41 with their operational role in the national defense strategy?

54:47 Sir, I'm assuming that question's coming to me since you're looking at me.

54:52 You would be correct.

54:53 Yeah, yes, sir.

54:53 Thank you, sir.

54:54 Um, you know, as a as a member of the guard, a proud member of the guard,

54:58 I'm I'm mindful that every day when you mobilize the guard,

55:01 you mobilize the United States people.

55:05 [snorts]

55:04 Um, and they are now much more than a tactical reserve,

55:08 they're a strategic reserve.

55:10 Uh, the decisions on recapping the fighter

55:12 community live obviously within our civilian leadership,

55:16 but the requirements that they're out there getting

55:19 after every day as you alluded to, sir,

55:22 are are substantive and long-lasting beyond just the Title 32 force.

55:27 What I'm always inspired by is the professionalism of the guard and the reserves

55:33 who get more out of uh an airplane than one might think.

55:38 I mean, I go out there to Andrews often and still get to fly and my crew chiefs

55:43 are master sergeants and senior master sergeants who've been

55:47 on a particular airplane for a long, long time.

55:50 So, they'll continue to force extend that capability

55:53 due to the professionalism that they have.

55:55 It doesn't mean we don't have to take a hard

55:57 look at recap and make sure that the fourth generation

56:00 airplanes are on a pathway to fifth and sixth gen

56:04 as the department continues to look at what we're solving for.

56:12 Uh Mr.

56:12 Chairman, if we have another round of questions,

56:14 I'll I'll come back with another because my next question is probably

56:17 not going to yield me enough time and I'll yield back the balance.

56:21 Mr.

56:21 Cuellar.

56:22 Thank you, Mr.

56:22 Chairman, uh ranking member, Mr.

56:25 Secretary, all of y'all, thank you for and all the men and women,

56:28 thank you for your service.

56:29 I want to ask you about the Western Hemisphere.

56:32 I want to talk to you about Mexico and then the border.

56:35 Uh first of all, thank you for the work

56:38 that y'all are doing in the Western Hemisphere.

56:40 I've always said that we're looking at other parts of the world.

56:43 We have to look at our own backyard and we got

56:46 to make sure that the Western Hemisphere is is working with us.

56:50 So, thank you for that.

56:52 Uh anything y'all want to add to the work that y'all doing there,

56:55 I would ask you to talk to us a little bit about it.

56:58 Mexico is the other one, uh very important, very important partner of us.

57:03 Uh Michael, Congressman Michael McCaul myself were down there,

57:06 we pushed for the special operation forces, SEAL,

57:10 to do training exercises and for the first time,

57:13 we actually have military forces in Mexico,

57:16 which is very unique and and again, congratulations on that.

57:21 Uh if you can tell us what they're doing and we need to see more of that.

57:24 We also have talking about the the guard also,

57:27 we have the believe that California guard is

57:30 now for the first time a partnership with Mexico.

57:33 We've been pushing I've been pushing Texas,

57:36 but California got there before we did, but that's good.

57:40 And talk a little bit about that.

57:43 Also on the border, I want to thank you and the men and women

57:46 of Joint Task Force Southern Border

57:48 for the work that they're doing on the homeland.

57:51 They're in my area, Laredo and other places.

57:54 But I want to draw your attention to one particular threat,

57:58 that is the accelerating demand the cartels

58:01 are not only watching what's happening in Ukraine,

58:04 but they're learning from it and they're hearing from credible

58:09 reports about cartels looking at fiber optic drone systems.

58:15 And and we all know what that is.

58:17 And my question is, what is the department

58:19 doing to get ahead ahead of this threat?

58:22 How are you investing in the counter

58:23 UAS capabilities to defeat fiber optics drone systems?

58:29 And what lessons are we learning from what's happening?

58:33 You know, the procurement of bureaucrats, without due respect,

58:36 it takes a long time to get our systems.

58:39 Over there, the cartels, they got the money.

58:42 They don't have to go through a procurement system.

58:44 They'll just buy the drones and they're outmanning

58:47 us on the Mexican side along the border.

58:50 So, thank you.

58:51 And if you can address that or the chairman also.

58:56 Well, thank you, Congressman.

58:56 I very much appreciate your efforts in this realm for a very long time.

59:00 And I think you see in the National Security Strategy,

59:02 the National Defense Strategy, Western Hem and Homeland is priority number one.

59:06 We may pace to to the ability on the first island chain,

59:09 but priority number one is here.

59:11 And you've seen it through America's Counter Cartel Coalition and getting after

59:15 the designated terrorist organizations that are trafficking

59:17 drugs and humans in the United States,

59:19 something you've been talking a lot about.

59:20 And that's the beginning of our defense in depth.

59:22 It starts down there where they produce and where they move.

59:26 Then into Mexico where there we have had

59:28 an impressive unprecedented amount of partnership and we appreciate that.

59:31 We would encourage uh Defensa and Marina to continue

59:35 uh where they can uh to partner and do more.

59:38 That's the expectation of the United States government,

59:41 of the Mexican government is step up so that we don't have to.

59:44 And then sealing that Southwest border uh is the defense of the American people.

59:48 It's the defense of the homeland and you talk to the troops

59:50 that are down there doing that, they're proud of it.

59:52 It We also have multiple national defense

59:54 areas there uh which are controlled by DOW

59:57 where we can do rapid testing

59:59 on on uh counter counter UAS Coyote 401 capabilities.

1:00:04 So we're using those places to streamline

1:00:06 the process by which we see what the cartels are trying to do and get after it

1:00:10 with new capabilities that we can then field elsewhere,

1:00:12 also learning from Ukraine in the process.

1:00:15 I would defer to the chairman.

1:00:16 Sure, I'll just uh add a few things onto this.

1:00:19 It's a the Russia-Ukraine lessons learned and the application of those lessons

1:00:24 by uh other actors like cartels is one we're focused a lot on it.

1:00:29 It's going to require a whole-of-government effort.

1:00:32 As the secretary mentioned,

1:00:33 we do have joint interagency task force 401 led by an incredible Army

1:00:39 one-star uh Brigadier General Matt Ross who's

1:00:42 focused solely in a chairman's controlled activity.

1:00:45 So 401 reports up to me and in turn then to the secretary

1:00:49 to make sure that we're entrepreneurially looking at how to sense, see, detect,

1:00:55 and defeat the range of small UAS threats uh and you know uh General Ross is

1:01:03 out was just out in CENTCOM looking at some

1:01:05 of the challenges that they're having over there.

1:01:07 Uh it'll continue to be an area of significant focus for the joint force, sir.

1:01:13 Well, my time is up, but I want to ask you to continue working with Mexico.

1:01:18 You You do have unprecedented uh partnerships, but the more we can push them,

1:01:23 they're allies, there's a historical sensitivity, we know why,

1:01:29 uh, but the more you can push them, uh,

1:01:30 to get them to work with us, that would be, uh, great.

1:01:33 Thank you so much for all of y'all.

1:01:35 Thank you, gentlemen.

1:01:37 Chairman Rogers.

1:01:39 Thank you, Mr.

1:01:39 Chairman.

1:01:41 Secretary Hagseth, General Cain, Mr.

1:01:43 Hurst, thank you for being here.

1:01:46 And thank you, more importantly, for your service to the country.

1:01:51 The 2026 National Defense Strategy, uh,

1:01:56 makes clear that China is the pacing challenge.

1:02:03 And this budget request puts real resources behind that nomenclature,

1:02:08 including 11.7 billion for the Pacific Deterrence Initiative.

1:02:16 My concern is that we're we're

1:02:19 not just competing against China's military capability.

1:02:26 We're competing against the speed at which China can build,

1:02:33 replace, and influence.

1:02:37 Where are some, uh, capability gaps when it

1:02:42 comes to a potential conflict with the PRC?

1:02:47 And General Cain, how how will your priority

1:02:50 is posture the joint force to close those gaps?

1:02:56 Chairman, thank thanks for the question, um, and, you know,

1:02:59 the speed at their production capability is one

1:03:02 of the reasons why I'm grateful for, uh, the full team's partnership on speeding

1:03:09 up the US defense industrial base efforts,

1:03:13 as well as the national industrial base efforts.

1:03:16 And I'd really like to thank those mom and pop machine shops and second, third,

1:03:22 fourth tier suppliers that live in all of your districts who are also

1:03:27 increasing speed and capability without losing quality

1:03:32 across the entirety of our manufacturing system.

1:03:35 And it's going to require all of that.

1:03:37 And when we look at the range of capabilities

1:03:40 that we must have to be properly armed and globally integrated,

1:03:44 that extends to things like,

1:03:46 you know, long-range fires and really an ability to arm our joint force

1:03:52 to win from the seabed to cis-lunar space in every single domain in there.

1:03:58 And I'll defer to the comptroller

1:04:00 and to the secretary to talk about the particular elements,

1:04:04 but the goal is the range and mix

1:04:06 of capabilities that create outsized dilemmas for Xi

1:04:11 Jinping and others that are out there

1:04:14 to ensure that we maintain and sustain deterrence.

1:04:17 Thank you.

1:04:19 Amen.

1:04:19 Thank you.

1:04:21 Second, the war between the US and Iran reinforces an old lesson,

1:04:30 which is that modern conflict comes down to attrition.

1:04:37 China has been able to produce naval ships

1:04:41 at a pace our industrial base can't match.

1:04:46 The ships are not as large as ours, but quantity has a quality of its own.

1:04:54 How are we postured for an economy of force in the Pacific,

1:05:00 particularly if Taiwan is invaded?

1:05:07 I'll search channel in my my inner Clausewitz,

1:05:11 um is always uh I try to remember the the big moving parts of war fighting.

1:05:16 You know, we're not really doing economy of force work in the Pacific.

1:05:21 As you alluded to, sir, and others have, it's our primary uh focus.

1:05:26 And so, on a a daily, you know, on a daily basis,

1:05:30 we come to the secretary with a range of military options across the world uh

1:05:36 so that he and the president can

1:05:38 carefully consider those military actions and associated risks.

1:05:43 It all comes back to the budgetary tools that you'll

1:05:47 hopefully give us in the authorities to achieve those capabilities.

1:05:51 And as we look, for example, at ship building, which you talked about,

1:05:55 I'm grateful for uh the work that the Navy is

1:05:58 doing to scale that effort uh to ensure that we

1:06:02 offer and continue to offer those range of options

1:06:06 to our civilian leaders uh here in the United States.

1:06:11 Quickly to uh epic fury, uh the our fight with Iran has

1:06:19 confirmed what defense planners had long warned about.

1:06:25 Iran doesn't need a peer military to cause serious problems.

1:06:30 His playbook, the cheap drones built from commercial parts,

1:06:36 sea mines in contested straits, fast attack craft, and anti-ship missiles,

1:06:45 the war also confirmed a harder lesson.

1:06:49 Even with overwhelming firepower,

1:06:52 the side that runs out of munitions or air defenses first loses.

1:07:01 Are we, Mr.

1:07:02 Secretary, are we secure in that point?

1:07:08 Absolutely.

1:07:08 [clears throat] Um and we we are winning,

1:07:13 have won every component of what we fought in this conflict.

1:07:16 Iran knows that based on the incredible degradation of their capabilities.

1:07:21 Uh and which is why we saw them wanting to come to the table.

1:07:24 How this gets resolved will be on our terms, on President Trump's terms,

1:07:27 and we have all the munitions and capabilities necessary to uh enable that.

1:07:32 Thank you.

1:07:33 You're welcome.

1:07:35 Thank you, gentlemen.

1:07:35 Mr.

1:07:36 Aguilar.

1:07:37 Thank you, Mr.

1:07:37 Chairman.

1:07:38 Thank you all for being here.

1:07:40 Um Mr.

1:07:42 Hurst, on on April 29th, as you indicated to the ranking member,

1:07:45 you said that the Iran war had cost $25 billion in total.

1:07:50 You reaffirmed that today.

1:07:51 Do you have any Do you have any other updated

1:07:55 costs or projections um since that uh testimony that you've given?

1:08:00 Outside reporting estimates have indicated that the war

1:08:03 cost could be a billion dollars a day.

1:08:05 Do you have any anything to share?

1:08:08 Yeah, thanks for the question, sir.

1:08:10 Uh so at the time of testimony in front of the ask, it was $25 billion.

1:08:14 But the joint staff team and the comptroller

1:08:16 team are constantly looking at that estimate.

1:08:18 And so now we think it's closer to 29.

1:08:20 Uh that's because of updated repair and replacement of equipment cost,

1:08:25 and also uh just general operational costs keep people in theater.

1:08:29 Thank you.

1:08:29 I appreciate that.

1:08:30 Mr.

1:08:30 Secretary, when can you share more formal accounting on the cost

1:08:35 of the war with with Congress and with this committee?

1:08:40 Um we'll share what we can.

1:08:41 I think we've updated uh on that number this morning,

1:08:44 but uh when it's when it's relevant and required, we will share it.

1:08:51 I I think this would be the format um that it's that it would be required.

1:08:55 Uh Mr.

1:08:55 Secretary, on that same day uh April 29th,

1:08:58 you testified that the current ceasefire meant that the 60-day

1:09:02 calendar with the war powers resolution was paused.

1:09:06 Um who are the parties to the ceasefire?

1:09:12 Right now we are in that same ceasefire as of right now.

1:09:15 Wasn't the question who are the parties to

1:09:17 It'll be the United States and and the regime in Iran.

1:09:22 Who?

1:09:24 How many pages is the ceasefire?

1:09:26 What deal points?

1:09:27 I'm not asking you to share the contents.

1:09:29 I guess what what I'm trying to ask is how do we

1:09:32 know that the ceasefire is is active or not active without any documentation?

1:09:42 We know it's evident and the ceasefire [clears throat] is in effect.

1:09:47 But you is it is it pages?

1:09:49 Is it is it 15 points?

1:09:51 There's been different points that have moved around.

1:09:55 Um you know, is there any other how do we know?

1:09:59 You just trust that the president knows

1:10:01 that the ceasefire is active or not active?

1:10:03 As you know, for the most part a ceasefire

1:10:05 means the fire is ceasing and we know that has

1:10:08 occurred while negotiations occur and there are lots

1:10:10 of different discussions with our negotiating team that are happening.

1:10:14 I'm there when those discussions are occurring.

1:10:17 Different drafts, different perspectives.

1:10:19 So it's a very dynamic situation where

1:10:21 a negotiated settlement could be the outcome

1:10:24 here where Iran does not have nuclear

1:10:26 capabilities and from the Department of War perspective,

1:10:28 we are here to support those options.

1:10:32 On May 5th, you announced the launch of Project Freedom which is a new

1:10:35 exercise where CENTCOM will help coordinate ship

1:10:38 traffic and guide commercial ships through the strait.

1:10:41 President Trump then announced the operation concluded that evening.

1:10:44 Now it seems that the we may be revisiting that.

1:10:49 Can you give us the latest on Project Freedom?

1:10:53 Well, as it pertains to battlefield options,

1:10:55 we're not we don't disclose those types of things,

1:10:58 but ultimately at the as the president stated publicly and in his truth

1:11:02 at the request of the Pakistanis and given the options in the negotiation,

1:11:06 it was paused and it's an option we

1:11:07 could always recommence should the commander-in-chief want us to.

1:11:11 Is the is the theory to create more ceasefires

1:11:14 or more projects just to evade the War Powers Act?

1:11:20 The theory of the entire case is to prevent Iran from having a nuclear weapon.

1:11:25 And if that has to be done kinetically and militarily,

1:11:27 the Department of War is locked and loaded and ready to do that.

1:11:30 If it happens through Project Freedom where you move commerce through,

1:11:34 if it has to if it happens through a negotiated deal,

1:11:36 the president was very clear even yesterday.

1:11:38 This is actually quite simple.

1:11:40 Iran will never have a nuclear weapon one way or another and we're here

1:11:44 to support as one tool of the whole of government to make that happen.

1:11:49 General Keane the depleted munitions have been a a subject

1:11:53 of some of the discussions that you've even heard here today.

1:11:58 With respect to stockpiles that we have around the world,

1:12:02 key regions like the Indo-Pacific,

1:12:04 the Middle East um you know, can you give us an update?

1:12:08 What are the What are you hearing from the combatant

1:12:11 commands about their munitions status around the world?

1:12:20 Well, sir, we we we have sufficient munitions

1:12:23 for what we're tasked to do right now.

1:12:25 That's what I hear from the COCOMs.

1:12:27 What I will say is I I will always want more.

1:12:30 So, I appreciate the effort of this committee and the Congress.

1:12:34 We're always going to want more munitions.

1:12:38 Secretary Haig, what are you doing to support

1:12:40 the involved services to to recap their losses?

1:12:45 We're submitting a $1.5 trillion budget that will remake the department

1:12:49 and ensure that every warfighter in the future has exactly what they need

1:12:51 and we're never in a fair fight and I I take issue

1:12:54 with the the characterization that munitions are depleted in a public forum.

1:12:58 That's not true.

1:12:59 And ultimately we have all the munitions needed to execute what we need

1:13:01 to execute and we're going to ensure

1:13:03 that we supercharge that going into the future.

1:13:05 I think you've heard differences from both sides of the aisle on that point.

1:13:07 Yield back, Mr.

1:13:08 Chairman.

1:13:08 Thank you, gentlemen.

1:13:09 Judge Carter.

1:13:14 Uh thank you, Mr.

1:13:14 Chairman and welcome to each of you.

1:13:17 Glad you're here.

1:13:19 Uh Start off with something something that I'm concerned about.

1:13:26 Uh Mr.

1:13:27 Secretary, my MILCON VA subcommittee is aware of living conditions

1:13:34 of the 68W combat medic students at the Joint Base San Antonio.

1:13:41 Frankly, they're very unacceptable and quite unlivable.

1:13:46 Uh [snorts] as chairman of the MILCON Committee,

1:13:49 I'm deeply concerned that there appears to be

1:13:52 no imminent path forward to fix these issues.

1:13:57 What actions is the department taking to improve these living conditions,

1:14:03 ensure our soldiers receive safe and dignified housing

1:14:08 now now and not in the years to come.

1:14:12 Our budget cannot fix that.

1:14:15 It's not we don't have enough money.

1:14:18 You got all the money.

1:14:19 What do you think about that?

1:14:22 First of all, let's fix that.

1:14:24 Whatever whatever unit that is,

1:14:25 we want to know about it and we're going to get a team out there

1:14:27 right away to address it and we've used

1:14:29 discrete examples like that to find the gaps

1:14:31 in why we're not getting at it on a more at a more holistic fashion

1:14:34 cuz we we've came in on a huge deficit of maintenance on barracks and housing.

1:14:40 This this budget This budget funds that.

1:14:42 It also We're also going to pursue MILCON reform

1:14:45 because in too many places we're trying to build

1:14:47 things around MILCON as opposed to using MILCON because

1:14:50 MILCON is so bureaucratic and slow in its process.

1:14:53 So, we look forward to working with you to to fix that.

1:14:56 Not just these just this discrete barracks issue,

1:14:59 but where we found them, we fixed it,

1:15:01 and then we've energized the system through a barracks task

1:15:03 force to to flow money exactly where it needs to go.

1:15:07 And I have I'm a champion of speeding up MILCON everywhere we can.

1:15:12 And we are We've I've been out to the to uh Guam and some of those places,

1:15:19 and we got a lot of needs out that way.

1:15:22 And then we're way beyond what our budget will sustain.

1:15:27 But I have another question for you.

1:15:30 Uh I represent Fort Hood,

1:15:32 the home of the uh First Air Cavalry Division brigade operating Apaches,

1:15:41 Blackhawks, and Chinook helicopters.

1:15:45 I'm concerned that the FY27 budget request does not support these programs,

1:15:52 essentially zeroing out funding across three platforms.

1:15:57 Despite the Army stating that we're going to use

1:16:00 these aircraft and they will operate for decades to come.

1:16:05 With that, the Chinook has no replacement for heavy lift mission.

1:16:12 Now, will the department manage aviation modernization?

1:16:17 And how will they do that without creating

1:16:20 readiness problems and capability gaps in the future?

1:16:25 Plus, the planned future lift is not like the Chinook.

1:16:33 Sir, I think it's a very fair point.

1:16:35 I think it goes to the previous mindset of divest to invest

1:16:38 that was an austerity point of view that we inherited at our department.

1:16:42 We've made some changes at the Army.

1:16:44 We might have a slightly different view of the Army transformation initiative.

1:16:47 Some of it is very good.

1:16:49 There's a lot of goodness in there,

1:16:50 but I think there are some things that assumed

1:16:53 future platforms that may not be there yet.

1:16:55 Take the Apache for example, which uh our our warfighters rely on and love.

1:17:00 Take the Chinook, which is used all all the time.

1:17:02 We need to make sure we've got something there for it

1:17:05 before you divest or it it we're not investing in that capability.

1:17:08 So, we look forward to reviewing that with you

1:17:10 and ensuring that we don't have a gap.

1:17:12 Yeah, because the budget doesn't have anything it zeros out

1:17:16 all three of those as far as we we read it.

1:17:20 Well, then I I'd like to take I'll take another look at that with our team.

1:17:25 Okay.

1:17:24 Thank you, Mr.

1:17:25 Chairman.

1:17:30 Thank you, gentlemen.

1:17:31 Uh Mr.

1:17:31 Case.

1:17:33 Thank you, Chairman.

1:17:33 Mr.

1:17:34 Hurst, what is the total replacement cost of the material

1:17:38 that we have expended in Iran to date?

1:17:44 By the way, I by material I refer to munitions.

1:17:48 I refer to um you know, planes to drones to stuff that we keep in our stockpile.

1:17:54 Yeah, I'll exclude military construction from this because we don't

1:17:57 know what that's going to look like in the future,

1:17:58 but I would say it's around $24 billion.

1:18:03 Okay.

1:18:03 Replacement and repair.

1:18:04 And that's um through what date?

1:18:07 That's our current estimate.

1:18:10 Okay.

1:18:09 I'm looking at a um report in the uh public sphere from CSIS dated April 21st,

1:18:15 uh which calculates um estimated um cost unit

1:18:21 cost aggregate unit cost of seven precision uh systems.

1:18:27 So, I'm talking, you know, Tomahawk, JASSM, PRISM, SM-3, SM-6, THAAD, Patriot.

1:18:33 Those seven at about $25 billion.

1:18:36 Um is that does that sound about right?

1:18:39 I mean you're you're projecting everything at about 23.

1:18:43 Yeah, I'm most confident in our projections on munitions costs.

1:18:47 That's the easiest thing to calculate.

1:18:49 So that number sounds a little high to me for that stage of the war.

1:18:54 Okay.

1:18:54 We've lost about 39 aircraft according to a report

1:18:57 in the war zone and that's an old one.

1:18:59 That's almost one month old.

1:19:01 You have a replacement cost on all of those aircraft.

1:19:03 Now understanding that some of that aircraft is not replaceable but presumably

1:19:08 you would have to replace it with some kind of capacity.

1:19:11 There are costs there sir but I want to get back to you in writing and what

1:19:14 they specifically are because as you can imagine repair

1:19:17 of aircraft is something that's very hard to calculate.

1:19:20 We want to do a full diagnosis of the aircraft before we estimate that cost.

1:19:23 Okay, but that's not in your estimate of somewhere around

1:19:26 29 cost of war that you that you gave us.

1:19:29 That's included.

1:19:30 That's what we have right now.

1:19:31 Oh, I see.

1:19:31 That is part of it.

1:19:32 Yeah, but it's an estimate especially for repair

1:19:34 costs and so that could change over time.

1:19:37 Okay.

1:19:37 And you did talk about MilCon which was a question that I had.

1:19:40 Do you have any cuz I mean we've obviously

1:19:42 suffered major damage to our infrastructure in the Middle East.

1:19:46 Do you have a you don't have a MilCon estimate yet?

1:19:49 We have a lot of unknowns there.

1:19:50 We don't know what our future posture is going to be.

1:19:52 We don't know how we construct those bases and we don't know

1:19:54 what part our allies and partners could pay into the MilCon cost.

1:19:57 And so we don't have a good estimate for that at the time.

1:20:00 Okay.

1:20:01 What about fuel?

1:20:01 Is that a major calculation in your cost of war?

1:20:05 Fuel used depletion of fuel reserves replenishing that reserve.

1:20:11 We wrapped that into our operations and maintenance costs.

1:20:15 Okay, that's an unknown then.

1:20:19 Okay, going to your FY26 budget request.

1:20:22 You've got procurement.

1:20:24 Let's just focus on procurement cuz that's what we're talking about largely.

1:20:27 You've got 413 billion dollars which

1:20:30 in and of itself is an 84% increase over FY20.

1:20:35 Uh I'm sorry.

1:20:35 I mean 27 20 27 versus 26.

1:20:40 Um and you have 38% of that total procurement request in reconciliation.

1:20:49 Does that reconciliation request include anything from the war in Iran?

1:20:57 Obviously, we're buying things in the reconciliation request

1:21:00 that are being used in the Iran conflict including munitions.

1:21:03 There's over $40 billion in munitions requests in in reconciliation

1:21:07 and so that would be a part of the replacement.

1:21:10 Okay.

1:21:11 So, what I'm trying to get at is is your reconciliation request in FY27 related

1:21:15 to Iran or is it not related to Iran or what what's is it all

1:21:21 You know how long our budget generation process is and the appropriation

1:21:24 cycle and so we we completed this before the Iran conflict.

1:21:27 Exactly.

1:21:28 Okay.

1:21:28 So, what you're coming back to us with is

1:21:31 not the I mean the reconciliation is not about Iran.

1:21:34 The reconciliation is about assumptions that were made before Iran.

1:21:38 It's about making a generational investment

1:21:40 in the joint force and building military readiness.

1:21:43 That's what my request is.

1:21:46 Okay.

1:21:45 Um I'm going to get back to some

1:21:49 of the questions that were asked earlier which is what

1:21:52 is the assumption that you are making in terms

1:21:55 of of of future reconciliation bills in future fiscal years?

1:22:01 How much of this is loaded into this particular fiscal year?

1:22:03 You had a big reconciliation last year which was which was portrayed

1:22:07 in the same light and now you're coming back for a huge one this year.

1:22:11 Is another one on the horizon next year then?

1:22:15 For our a budget request for 28,

1:22:16 we we expect a request that is discretionary only.

1:22:20 Uh and I believe the top line for that is

1:22:21 1.23 which will be our our request that year.

1:22:25 Okay.

1:22:26 I yield back.

1:22:28 Thanks, gentlemen.

1:22:30 Mr.

1:22:30 Diaz-Balart.

1:22:33 Thank you, Mr.

1:22:33 Chairman.

1:22:35 Thank you, gentlemen, and more importantly, the folks that you lead.

1:22:38 Federal government does a lot of important things,

1:22:39 but nothing more important than what you all deal with.

1:22:43 Let me Let me get back to this hemisphere.

1:22:46 I'm very, very grateful that the administration

1:22:48 is finally really focused on Western Hemisphere,

1:22:51 and it's actually going to show we're going

1:22:53 to be able to show that it's saving American lives.

1:22:55 But But let me just to you, Mr.

1:22:58 Secretary, let me throw a couple of points

1:22:59 and see if you disagree with any of these.

1:23:01 And And let me talk about the the one

1:23:04 state sponsor of terrorism in the Western Hemisphere, which is the Cuban regime.

1:23:08 Uh Are you aware that they harbor terrorists and US fugitives from US law?

1:23:15 And we can just go through these really quick.

1:23:17 Uh yes.

1:23:17 All right.

1:23:17 Yes.

1:23:18 Yes, I am.

1:23:18 Um is it true that the Cuban regime actually shot

1:23:21 down two American airplanes in international airspace and murdered Americans?

1:23:26 I don't I can't recall the precise year, but I believe that is the case.

1:23:30 Uh is it true that that Russian spy ships and warships,

1:23:34 including the nuclear sub Kazan Kazan, have repeatedly used Cuban ports?

1:23:40 Uh that is true.

1:23:43 Congressman.

1:23:42 Is it true that the site of the Russian Sigint complex in Lourdes

1:23:47 was has once again become a hub for Russian intelligence within Cuba?

1:23:51 Well, we've long been concerned that a foreign adversary using

1:23:55 that kind of location that close to our shores is highly problematic.

1:23:59 Yes.

1:23:59 And is it also true that now the Chinese also are there?

1:24:03 I wouldn't want to reveal anything that should be classified,

1:24:05 but we we don't want foreign adversaries attempting to use that environment.

1:24:10 Well stated.

1:24:11 Um are you aware that Well, you are obviously aware that that Cubans

1:24:16 intel people and and military folks have been have been sent around the world

1:24:21 because your folks confronted them in Venezuela.

1:24:24 Um But are you also aware that according to Ukrainian intelligence,

1:24:28 there are thousands of Cubans fighting for Russia in Ukraine?

1:24:34 I was not aware of that particular fact,

1:24:36 but I am well aware that Cubans have been around

1:24:38 the globe to include attempting to defend Maduro in Venezuela.

1:24:41 So that is something they've done for a long time.

1:24:43 Yes.

1:24:44 You're also aware Mr.

1:24:45 Secretary that well,

1:24:46 even stated by US intelligence even during the Biden administration,

1:24:51 the Trump administration, the previous administration,

1:24:54 the Obama administration that Cuba has been designated

1:24:57 as one of the four most advanced espionage

1:24:59 operations against the United States and that they

1:25:02 share intel with other adversaries of the United States.

1:25:06 That all very much sounds right, sir.

1:25:08 And again, we're not in a classified setting.

1:25:11 So I'm just considering all those issues and others

1:25:14 that we could talk about in a classified setting.

1:25:17 Do you believe that the Cuban regime possesses

1:25:19 a national security threat to the United States?

1:25:23 I do.

1:25:26 Let let me now focus on Iran as I have a little bit of time left over.

1:25:30 You Mr.

1:25:30 Secretary, you've been very clear what the goal is.

1:25:33 But the goal that you're saying is not

1:25:36 the goal that just this administration has had vis-a-vis Iran.

1:25:40 It's been the goal of multiple presidents of the United States, right?

1:25:43 Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.

1:25:46 But I'd like to also ask you about Iran's offensive

1:25:49 ballistic missiles and their offensive drones and their use of terrorism.

1:25:54 Are those also issues that um would

1:25:58 be factors in a negotiated settlement with Iran?

1:26:03 Um because I I don't have to tell

1:26:05 you that there been negotiations at nauseam with Iran.

1:26:09 The Iranians continue to cut deals and yet they violate those deals.

1:26:14 But it's interesting in in the in the nuclear

1:26:16 deal that was cut with Iran during the Obama administration,

1:26:22 missiles weren't even in part of that deal.

1:26:24 As as as horrible as the deal was

1:26:26 dealing with the nuclear issue, nor was terrorism.

1:26:30 And I'm just hoping that those two issues, not only the nuclear deal,

1:26:33 which is paramount, but but offensive ballistic weapons,

1:26:37 missiles, and we saw we saw one that now

1:26:39 has the capability of of traveling rather rather far,

1:26:43 and also their spread of terrorism,

1:26:45 I hope that those also would be factors in any

1:26:49 resolution to this to this issue in Iran with Iran.

1:26:53 Well, sir, we're not we're not the negotiating team,

1:26:55 but I can tell you we have world-class negotiators.

1:26:57 The core of it is is the nuclear weapons issue.

1:27:01 Um those other factors are always a factor,

1:27:04 understanding that Iran has effectively tried to use

1:27:07 the North Korea strategy with such overwhelming

1:27:10 capabilities uh conventionally that no one would

1:27:13 dare prevent them from pursuing a nuclear weapon,

1:27:15 and it took President Trump to have the courage to make that historic decision.

1:27:19 Uh and hopefully we can get that across the finish line with with negotiations,

1:27:23 which are ongoing right now.

1:27:24 Mr.

1:27:24 Chairman, my time is up.

1:27:25 I yield back.

1:27:26 Thank you, sir.

1:27:27 Thank you, gentlemen.

1:27:28 Ms.

1:27:29 Lee.

1:27:30 Uh thank you, Mr.

1:27:30 Chairman.

1:27:32 Uh Secretary, Under Secretary, and General, thank you for being here.

1:27:36 Uh Secretary Hegseth, about 11 years ago US Air Force veteran Sergeant

1:27:41 David Creech served at who served at the Nevada Test

1:27:46 and Training Range realized for the first time that the health

1:27:49 problems he'd been experiencing were not an isolated instant incident,

1:27:54 but matched the health problems of many other

1:27:56 veterans who had served alongside him at Nitter.

1:28:00 He was sitting in his backyard reconnecting with eight of them and asked them,

1:28:05 "Does anyone here have tumors?" And six of eight of them raised

1:28:09 their hands and then proclaimed that even some of them had children with tumors.

1:28:15 Dave, as it happens,

1:28:16 had recently had a grape-sized tumor removed uh from his neck.

1:28:21 Three years ago, he came to Washington when the VA had refused

1:28:26 to provide him the kind of benefits and coverage he had earned

1:28:30 and which he needs from the VA because of his Department of Defense

1:28:35 would not provide the agency with his records of his Nitter service.

1:28:41 I helped introduce a bill two years ago uh

1:28:45 that and have been fighting on his behalf ever since.

1:28:49 What is most frustrating about this fight is not

1:28:53 that the federal government doesn't recognize

1:28:55 these health impacts of their service.

1:28:58 In fact, Congress 26 years ago provided a law

1:29:02 providing medical coverage and compensation for the Department

1:29:06 of Energy employees who served in the very same

1:29:09 location that Dave Crete and his colleagues had served in.

1:29:13 Instead, their fight is against the Department of Defense

1:29:17 red tape uh which you have been committed to fighting.

1:29:21 Thank you.

1:29:22 You see, one of the only things standing between the toxic

1:29:26 exposed exposed veterans at Nitter

1:29:29 and comprehensive health coverage and benefits

1:29:32 from the VA is documentation that the Department of Defense

1:29:37 has that will prove that they served where they actually did.

1:29:42 This documentation exists and we're just waiting for the Department to act.

1:29:48 Every day that you delay in providing this information,

1:29:52 another veteran and their family suffers unnecessarily.

1:29:57 Last week I had the opportunity to meet many of these veterans.

1:30:02 Two hours before I met them, one of them received a call from his oncologist

1:30:08 informing him that he had multiple myeloma, an incurable blood cancer.

1:30:14 Over the weekend, Dave was notified that two

1:30:17 more of his cohort had recent deaths.

1:30:21 The Invisible Enemy, which is an organization Dave founded,

1:30:24 maintains a memorial list of those who worked at Nitter and have passed away.

1:30:30 When Dave testified before the House Veterans

1:30:33 Affairs Committee uh round table 13 months ago, 462 veterans were on this list.

1:30:41 Today, that list includes 565 names.

1:30:46 Just 1 year of inaction has led to 130 103

1:30:51 veterans passing without the care that they received that they earned,

1:30:57 and their family without the benefits.

1:31:00 This list grows by an average of one every 2 days.

1:31:04 Mr.

1:31:04 Secretary, you have the authority to provide the VA with the documents

1:31:10 they need today uh to get these veterans the help they need.

1:31:15 These veterans have been waiting far too long.

1:31:18 Can you please commit to me that you will

1:31:22 be able to provide that list or that information

1:31:25 as soon as possible so that these veterans can get

1:31:29 the care and the benefits that they have rightfully earned.

1:31:35 Well, thank you for what you're doing for those folks,

1:31:37 and I can certainly commit to you today that, you know, my chief's right here.

1:31:40 We'll make we will get a review for me as soon as early as next week,

1:31:45 and I'll get back to you on on what our department's position should be on that.

1:31:49 Okay, well, I I First of all, we have the information.

1:31:55 The Department of Energy has provided these benefits

1:31:58 to the same cohort of people who alongside them.

1:32:03 I can't we cannot wait for another review.

1:32:05 I'm asking for your commitment.

1:32:07 I'm not talking about a full review.

1:32:08 I'm just talking about a familiarization.

1:32:10 So, I understand exactly what you're talking about,

1:32:12 wrap my arms around it, and then get you a response.

1:32:14 It's not a It's not a situation I have all the facts on.

1:32:17 I just want to get all the facts

1:32:18 and understand it before I commit to something like that.

1:32:20 All right.

1:32:21 I just uh like I said, one person every 2 days,

1:32:25 one veteran who has served this country is dying,

1:32:29 and their families are going without the benefits they earned.

1:32:33 I can't express how urgent this need is.

1:32:36 I thank you for your uh immediate attention to this issue.

1:32:42 Thanks, gentle lady.

1:32:43 Uh Mr.

1:32:43 Elsby.

1:32:45 Thank you, Mr.

1:32:46 Chairman.

1:32:46 Mr.

1:32:46 Secretary General Keane, Jay, thank you all for being here.

1:32:50 To all the staff sitting uncomfortably in very tight seats behind him,

1:32:53 thanks for your dedication to our country.

1:32:55 Master Chief Ison, you joined the Navy in 1987.

1:33:00 Ronald Reagan was still president.

1:33:01 You've been in uniform for 39 years.

1:33:04 I'd like to thank you and your family for all the sacrifices that you've made.

1:33:08 You're clearly the essential man,

1:33:10 and I uh I always want to point that out that uh you've

1:33:13 been serving uh in the Navy since I was a junior in high school.

1:33:16 And so, I'm very, very grateful.

1:33:19 As we address $1.5 trillion request, I I I want to say I appreciate

1:33:24 participating in the tabletop exercise at the Pentagon,

1:33:27 and I encourage all my colleagues to attend and do that.

1:33:30 It gives a very clear message on why we're

1:33:33 asking uh or you are asking for $1.5 trillion, and how it's justified.

1:33:38 Uh as we move forward with contested logistics,

1:33:42 and as uh eventually this war in Iran will end,

1:33:46 uh and the INDOPACOM becomes uh the focus again,

1:33:48 I'd like to see Congress fully fund

1:33:50 the request for the Marine Corps McClung class LSM,

1:33:53 and the KC-130J for both the Navy and the Marine Corps.

1:33:57 But, the budget request breaks them up, and I'm not sure how you skin that cat.

1:34:01 Uh moving to force protection and counter UAS as as we've seen

1:34:05 in Iran at uh nations that are somewhat far away from uh Iran,

1:34:09 we've had a force protection and counter UAS issue

1:34:12 as we've lost a uh a an E-3 AWACS,

1:34:16 which is worth 500 when we 500 million when we bought it,

1:34:19 but it's irreplaceable and there are fewer of those than B-21s.

1:34:22 I think we're seeing uh the uh the reach of uh

1:34:27 of UASs affect us in a way that we probably didn't anticipate,

1:34:31 and we need to continue to use uh new um

1:34:35 uh companies that are developing new technologies to go after UASs.

1:34:41 Uh General, you addressed uh Carl von Clausewitz,

1:34:44 so I'll use Sun Tzu as a counter.

1:34:46 Even the finest sword plunged into salt water will eventually rust.

1:34:50 And we deployed the USS Ford in June uh 24th of 2025.

1:34:55 It's going on 11 months at sea, and as one of only two people in the room

1:34:59 who have been on extended deployments on ships, myself and Mass Chief Isum,

1:35:04 I just want to point out thanks to the families who are sacrificing.

1:35:06 This is going to um harm a lot of families,

1:35:10 and and as we realized that every conflict we've

1:35:13 been in in the last year hasn't included the Ford,

1:35:16 and it's been essential to our operations.

1:35:19 It also points out the need for carriers, and I don't think 11 is enough,

1:35:23 but also recognize that downrange that's going to affect

1:35:26 the availability and the readiness of our force going forward.

1:35:31 Uh so, along with that, the capabilities

1:35:34 that a sixth-generation fighter on the carrier are so important.

1:35:37 As we've already seen, we've got the F-47.

1:35:39 We're going to downselect the FA-XX later this summer.

1:35:43 Uh General Cain, can you address why having both of those is so important?

1:35:48 Well, first uh sir, I want to echo your gratitude for the Ford.

1:35:53 Yesterday uh the air wing flew off.

1:35:56 So we know that Oceana was a very happy place as those aviators fought

1:36:03 through 800 ft broken to come up

1:36:04 initial as they should after a record-setting deployment.

1:36:08 So we welcome the Ford back.

1:36:10 You know, my job I won't comment on a particular program,

1:36:13 but the job that I'm in now is to offer a range

1:36:15 of options to include our ability to project power off CVN into the future.

1:36:20 So as our civilian leadership carefully considers that, I

1:36:24 know that'll be in the mix if if to selected.

1:36:27 And I know your colleagues in Virginia and in San

1:36:30 Diego are all focused on the same, sir.

1:36:36 They're going to have similar capabilities,

1:36:38 but I think as we switch to the Indo-Pacom region that as we talk about first,

1:36:43 second, third island chains,

1:36:44 which for most of the American people doesn't really mean that much,

1:36:48 but the ability to have a moving airfield in the Indo-Pacom

1:36:54 when we know that the Chinese are a pure adversary

1:36:59 have a number of hypersonic weapons that are going to be

1:37:02 aimed at fixed points such as islands where our forces are.

1:37:06 It's just extremely important that we recognize

1:37:09 that that a moving aircraft carrier with unique capabilities,

1:37:13 which obviously can't be addressed in a place like this, they can shoot

1:37:17 from outside the range of the capabilities

1:37:20 of our adversaries is extremely important.

1:37:23 I appreciate everything that y'all are doing.

1:37:25 You are addressing an issue that hasn't been

1:37:28 addressed in decades by asking for 1.5 trillion.

1:37:31 It's a hard ask.

1:37:33 It's going to be difficult for us to sell it,

1:37:34 but I think it's absolutely essential

1:37:36 for the defense of the United States including

1:37:38 a supplemental which even people on my side

1:37:42 of the aisle are saying they won't support.

1:37:43 This is merely to refurbish and replenish

1:37:46 that which we have expended in this conflict,

1:37:48 it's absolutely essential for the defense

1:37:50 of the United States and the Chinese are watching.

1:37:52 So, thank you for all three of you

1:37:54 and everybody in the room that works in this department.

1:37:57 Thank you for what you do.

1:37:58 I yield back.

1:37:59 Thank you, gentlemen.

1:37:59 Mr.

1:37:59 Morelli.

1:38:02 Thank you, uh, Mr.

1:38:03 Chairman.

1:38:03 I appreciate, uh, this hearing and thank you

1:38:06 all for for being here and for testifying.

1:38:09 I just wanted to make a general observation first of all.

1:38:11 I do get the sense that sometimes people

1:38:15 think that critical questions are unpatriotic, weak, or defeatist.

1:38:20 I just want to say for the record, I don't think that's the true.

1:38:23 I think it's the opposite.

1:38:24 And I appreciate, General Keane,

1:38:25 you've mentioned civilian leadership and civilian civilian control

1:38:29 a number of times in your testimony this morning.

1:38:31 We're the Congress.

1:38:33 Uh, civilian control that you have talked about begins and ends here,

1:38:37 and that's the way the founders put in Article 1.

1:38:39 Responsibility for funding and for declarations

1:38:42 of war are with the United States Congress.

1:38:44 So, I want to just mention that because I hear it all the time.

1:38:48 And we are not in any way,

1:38:49 when we ask critical questions, demeaning or in any way uh,

1:38:53 reducing our tremendous respect for the men and women of the military,

1:38:57 the joint forces of the United States.

1:38:58 So, I feel like that needs to be said, and I I I I appreciate,

1:39:02 um, the comments that you made, General Keane, about civilian control.

1:39:06 Second, as it relates to mandatory spending versus discretionary,

1:39:09 I think this is really important.

1:39:11 This committee, the Appropriations Committee,

1:39:13 and the Defense Subcommittee is is given

1:39:15 the responsibility by the Congress and by the American

1:39:18 people to make sure that we have an appreciation for all the dollars,

1:39:22 taxpayer dollars, that go into defending this nation.

1:39:25 And questions, again, uh, ought to be here.

1:39:28 Transparency begins here.

1:39:30 Uh, oversight begins here.

1:39:32 And mandatory spending avoids the responsibility this committee has to report

1:39:36 to the American people on how our money is being spent.

1:39:39 So, I I just, again, want to stress how important it is.

1:39:43 Uh I appreciate my friend Mr.

1:39:45 Else's comments about the $1.5 trillion request.

1:39:49 If it is so obvious to everyone and to the American

1:39:51 people that that's the dollar amount we need,

1:39:53 we ought not be going through this mandatory discretionary uh supplemental.

1:39:57 Let's Let's put it all on the table

1:39:59 and let's make the case to the American people.

1:40:02 Um you know, we've now waited since February 28th is by my count 11 weeks,

1:40:09 74 days since hostilities began in Iran,

1:40:12 and trying to get a uh a a a reporting of the dollars

1:40:17 that have been spent in this has been excruciating and it's been long.

1:40:20 I think General Washington uh reported quicker to the Continental Congress uh

1:40:25 than this has been in terms of reports to the United States Congress.

1:40:28 And I would just in the strongest terms urge that we move forward and give

1:40:33 this committee a full reporting on what the cost of this endeavor has been.

1:40:38 With that, um I didn't want to make

1:40:40 a a quick You men- You mentioned something, Mr.

1:40:43 Mr.

1:40:43 Secretary, in your opening comments about private

1:40:46 companies making private investments in our defense.

1:40:49 I assume they're getting compensated for the investment.

1:40:51 When you say private investment,

1:40:53 are you suggesting companies are making investments

1:40:54 for which they will not be compensated?

1:40:57 Uh yes, I am, Why would they do that?

1:41:00 Because we're turning it It's It's the right question and because we've

1:41:04 done it one way for years and years and gotten the same results,

1:41:08 so this is changing the paradigm.

1:41:10 Companies now know we're going to give them orders for 5 to 7 years

1:41:13 on exclusive munitions in exchange for them

1:41:16 paying for capitalization of their own plants.

1:41:19 We used to pay for them to build

1:41:20 their plants and then buy the munitions from them.

1:41:22 So now because they know they got they got consistent

1:41:26 But they are No, I appreciate I appreciate what you're saying.

1:41:28 They're up fronting costs are now paying for their own plants and equipment.

1:41:32 That's a That is a brand new paradigm.

1:41:34 The taxpayer's not paying for it.

1:41:36 That's $50 of value that you don't have

1:41:39 to appropriate because the companies are paying for it themselves.

1:41:42 And the companies will not get compensated.

1:41:44 They're going to make that as a charitable

1:41:45 contribution to the United States government.

1:41:47 Their compensation is long lead times of munitions that they

1:41:50 will produce and we will pay for in the future,

1:41:52 but we don't have to build the factories and I mean Yeah.

1:41:55 I'm reclaiming my time.

1:41:56 Reclaiming.

1:41:56 I just want to be clear.

1:41:57 Wait.

1:41:57 Just a I appreciate what you're saying,

1:41:59 but let's not let let me let's let's be honest.

1:42:02 They're going to get compensated.

1:42:04 I look, I'm for that and I appreciate what you're saying

1:42:07 in terms of lead time and dependability and reliability of funding,

1:42:11 but but let's be clear.

1:42:12 Um I want to switch topics if I can for a second.

1:42:15 Um the um Uh there's been much reported about the president's trip to to China

1:42:21 and I appreciate again my colleagues who have raised Indo-Pacom and its defense.

1:42:26 Uh there are weapon sales which have been on hold that the president has not

1:42:30 authorized to Taiwan and I wonder if you could give me an update either uh Mr.

1:42:34 Secretary or General Keane on what the status

1:42:37 of those weapon sales are at this point.

1:42:40 I I just want to say that the primes will

1:42:42 be paying for those factories out of their own pocket,

1:42:44 not the department's money or the taxpayers' money, which is a sea change,

1:42:48 which is why I think this budget is so good.

1:42:49 to get a return on their investment and which by the way this is America.

1:42:52 I'm welcome.

1:42:52 Well, we welcome a return on investment.

1:42:54 This is a Yes, I understand, but they're not paying for it

1:42:56 out of their pocket and not getting compensated.

1:42:58 But anyway, could you answer my question about Taiwan?

1:43:00 Buildings cost money and if we're giving them $2 billion to build the factory,

1:43:04 that's taxpayer money.

1:43:05 If they're using it out of their own hide,

1:43:07 that's $2 billion saved for the American people that then we

1:43:10 can appropriate toward munitions that we pay for in the future.

1:43:14 I know it's difficult to grasp.

1:43:15 It's not difficult to grasp.

1:43:17 It's it's it's it's a different way of getting to the same place.

1:43:20 You're going to pay for it.

1:43:21 The United States and look, we ought to they're building things for us,

1:43:25 but to suggest that somehow they're making an investment that they're not

1:43:27 going to get compensated through sales is just it's honestly kind of ridiculous.

1:43:32 to pay for the building, too, and then pay for the sales.

1:43:35 And now we're paying for the sales,

1:43:36 but not the building, which I think is a good

1:43:38 And they're not embedding that in the price

1:43:40 of the things that they're selling to us.

1:43:42 The price Capitalization, the CAPEX that they're putting into it,

1:43:45 they're going to get back.

1:43:46 I look, I don't know why we're even arguing about it.

1:43:48 They're paying for it.

1:43:49 Could you answer my question about Taiwan arms?

1:43:51 Oh, that's the president's on the cusp of a trip,

1:43:53 and I'll be with him, and he will make all the decisions related to that.

1:43:56 I yield back.

1:43:56 The gentleman's time has expired.

1:44:00 Make a quick point.

1:44:01 There is a There is a change.

1:44:02 The The industrial base is putting money at risk with the expectation of orders,

1:44:09 but there is no guarantee if in fact

1:44:12 that that uh particular product that they may

1:44:15 make uh is not met or meet the standards in which we we want to acquire it.

1:44:20 Uh and that is a significant change in what we've done in the past.

1:44:23 Mr.

1:44:23 Fleischmann.

1:44:25 Thank you, Mr.

1:44:25 Chairman, and thank you, Secretary.

1:44:27 I commend those changes in the innovation.

1:44:29 To everyone on this panel, thank you for a job well done.

1:44:33 Thank you for what you're doing for our country.

1:44:35 This is truly incredible.

1:44:37 So, let me start with that.

1:44:39 Um as Chairman of the Energy and Water Subcommittee,

1:44:43 I'm going to take a little bit different uh approach.

1:44:46 I'm deeply involved in the recapitalization

1:44:48 and modernization of our nation's nuclear deterrent.

1:44:52 As we are recapitalizing the entire strategic nuclear arsenal,

1:44:55 I remain concerned about the lack of options

1:44:58 lower on the escalation ladder available to the president.

1:45:01 In theater, non-strategic nuclear weapons have remained essential

1:45:05 to the credibility of our extended deterrent commitment to NATO.

1:45:09 Um I've got a couple of questions to ask,

1:45:11 but I'm going to ask General uh Keane and Secretary Heckseth,

1:45:16 what is your assessment of our non-strategic

1:45:18 nuclear capability gaps in the Indo-Pacific and elsewhere?

1:45:22 What additional tactical nuclear capabilities beyond SLCM-N should we

1:45:26 consider that would be most useful for reassuring allies,

1:45:30 deterring our adversaries, and providing combatant commands and usual options

1:45:36 in the worst-case event of a conflict?

1:45:41 We we're as you know, we're making a a $2 billion investment

1:45:44 and you mentioned Slick'em and and in FY26.

1:45:47 So, we're investing in that.

1:45:48 But, I I would say that uh a lot

1:45:51 of that discussion would be classified given our plans in the Indo-Pacific.

1:45:55 But, Admiral Paparo I I would say there's no COCOM

1:45:58 commander we have regular feedback with on what dilemmas we might

1:46:02 need to create for an adversary than Admiral Paparo and Indo-PACOM

1:46:05 to include everything that would deter any level of of aggression.

1:46:10 So, I I think there's a lot of sensitivity

1:46:12 on this topic that doesn't lend itself to this environment.

1:46:15 But, very much so we're looking at all options.

1:46:18 Thank you.

1:46:18 And I would also commend the Admiral Paparo.

1:46:20 He I mean, they're doing incredible work.

1:46:23 Yes, sir, General.

1:46:25 Sir, I was just acknowledging the secretary's

1:46:27 comment about what forum we're in here today.

1:46:30 You know, all three and I appreciate the Congress's leadership.

1:46:33 All three legs of the triad are undergoing modernization and all

1:46:38 require that and we're grateful for the assistance [snorts] from the Congress.

1:46:43 It's a bedrock to deterrence around the world

1:46:46 and one that we want to maintain our focus on.

1:46:49 I'll probably leave it at that and can come back if there's follow-up questions.

1:46:53 Thank you.

1:46:53 But, I would assure you gentlemen that in the energy and water bill which funds

1:46:56 this, we will certainly address that in a very

1:46:59 robust way as I think the administration has.

1:47:01 So, I thank you all.

1:47:03 Uh as most of you know, I in that bill,

1:47:06 I'm probably the nation's strongest proponent

1:47:08 supporter of nuclear power in Congress.

1:47:12 A nuclear propulsion has long provided our great

1:47:14 United States Navy with significant operational advantages.

1:47:18 Um there's been tremendous tremendous progress within

1:47:22 your department accelerating the adoption of nuclear energy

1:47:26 as a means of providing resilient and long

1:47:28 duration power generation for military installations and forward operations.

1:47:33 I'm excited about the Army's Janus program and the Air Force

1:47:36 just announced uh the first two air bases to receive microreactors.

1:47:42 My question, uh gentlemen, is can you walk us through how the department

1:47:46 is thinking about the role of nuclear power

1:47:48 across the joint force including naval propulsion and the use

1:47:52 of advanced reactors for base and expeditionary power?

1:47:56 What operational advantage do you see these technologies providing,

1:47:59 particularly in the Indo-Pacific,

1:48:02 and what can we be doing to accelerate and expand these efforts?

1:48:07 Both incredibly important capabilities, microreactors and propulsion,

1:48:12 uh whether you're looking at survivability,

1:48:14 sustainability of of basing and mobility within basing,

1:48:18 uh and the expectation in the homeland or abroad that the lights are

1:48:21 on and and and we can operate even if it's a contested environment.

1:48:24 And then there's just no doubt uh you can't you can't beat nuclear propulsion,

1:48:29 uh especially as we've refined it over time.

1:48:31 So, I appreciate your efforts and I think in this department

1:48:33 you'll find a friend in ensuring we maximize that.

1:48:36 Thank you, Mr.

1:48:37 Secretary General.

1:48:39 Sir, I'll just say that uh the Joint Staff has collaborated

1:48:42 and continues to do so with all the combatant commands, the services,

1:48:47 uh the secretary's team and office on OSW,

1:48:49 and the Congress to make sure that we're looking

1:48:52 at the range of energy requirements that we're going to have,

1:48:57 and that we move from frankly in some cases a reactive posture,

1:49:01 no no reaction into your nuclear point,

1:49:04 but to a more proactive stance around how we're going to ensure

1:49:09 energy uh sustainability in a range of situations that we could face.

1:49:15 So, we appreciate the we appreciate the chance to come in.

1:49:19 Thank you, General.

1:49:19 And again, once again, I begin with profound thanks.

1:49:21 I will end that way to all of you all.

1:49:24 You're back.

1:49:25 Thank you.

1:49:25 Thank you, gentlemen.

1:49:26 Mr.

1:49:26 Joyce.

1:49:28 Thank you, Chairman.

1:49:30 Thank you all for being here in uh defense or yes,

1:49:34 defense secretary war secretary, excuse me, uh Hexeth.

1:49:37 Godspeed on that project of changing our procurement process.

1:49:41 America is at its finest when capitalism

1:49:43 and and capital markets are allowed free

1:49:45 competition and you get to purchase the best of all those ideas out there.

1:49:49 Speaking of which, in June 2025,

1:49:51 Ukraine's Operation Spider Web, if you're familiar with it,

1:49:54 destroyed damaged dozens of Russian aircraft

1:49:56 on the ground using low-cost covertly infiltrated drones demonstrating

1:50:01 military installations are vulnerable to asymmetric drone

1:50:04 attacks at a fraction of conventional strike costs.

1:50:07 What steps are the is the department taking to protect our military bases

1:50:11 from covert drone attacks and do you

1:50:12 need additional funding to safeguard those assets?

1:50:16 Well, I appreciate the question and it's it's the battlefield trend, well,

1:50:20 one of a handful that we're most closely tracking and investing in.

1:50:25 $54 billion in defense autonomous warfare.

1:50:28 Recognition that every aspect of how we fight will be affected

1:50:32 by uh technology and techniques and tactics like like that one

1:50:37 and uh and every environment more contested than it's ever been

1:50:41 and the ability to both go on offense and defense in that environment

1:50:44 has to be something we're not just at parity with, but ahead

1:50:47 of adversaries to ensure that we can create the kind

1:50:50 of uh advantages we we're used to having and that's that's

1:50:53 our job is to ensure that we're looking around the corner.

1:50:56 And so, this investment in this budget, I don't know what it was, Jay, in FY26,

1:51:00 but it was a a a small fraction of $54

1:51:03 billion and we're even looking at dog and metamorphosizing it,

1:51:08 whether it's a joint task force into a sub unified command.

1:51:10 We're elevating this so we can push it through the services

1:51:14 and ensure that it's not just something we do in an exquisite way,

1:51:16 but it's how we fight at every echelon through the services,

1:51:20 and that budget number is is a reflection of that.

1:51:24 Well, you're getting attacked on a lot of fronts, Secretary Austin.

1:51:27 Can I just Can I just follow up with that Is that be okay?

1:51:30 Um one one one thing that I appreciate the partnership with the Congress

1:51:35 on is as we evolve from the war-fighting mix that we have right now,

1:51:40 the cost of precision and the cost of range is coming down.

1:51:45 And so as we look at this this budget,

1:51:48 we look at the mix of capabilities that we're going to have.

1:51:51 We talk about the agility in the defense

1:51:53 industrial base and the national industrial base.

1:51:57 The flexibility that we as teammates are going to have to have

1:52:01 to ensure that we're not buying behind the technology development curve,

1:52:06 but we're buying in front of it is something that I

1:52:08 we look in the joint force to partner with obviously OSW,

1:52:12 but also the the Congress on this.

1:52:14 This technology moves really fast.

1:52:16 Thank you.

1:52:18 No problem, sir.

1:52:18 I just wanted to touch another angle

1:52:20 that we're getting attacked at and unfortunately,

1:52:22 and that's the cyber threats from adversaries like China,

1:52:24 Russia, Iran, and criminal organizations which continue to grow.

1:52:28 Department's ability to defend critical

1:52:29 networks and support the military operations

1:52:31 depends on a strong and ready cyber workforce across all the services.

1:52:36 At the same time, unfortunately,

1:52:37 you're competing with the private sector which can

1:52:39 make recruiting and retaining qualified cyber personnel challenging.

1:52:42 Can you give us an assessment of where the Department's cyber workforce stands

1:52:46 today and what investments Congress can make to help you make that better?

1:52:51 Appreciate that question.

1:52:51 20 20 billion in cyber offense and defense.

1:52:54 I think the biggest change we've made across the joint

1:52:56 force is full integration of cyber as a war-fighting domain,

1:53:00 which it was always an appendage or something you might do.

1:53:03 And I think when you look at operations Epic Fury,

1:53:06 um absolute resolve with Maduro, the capabilities,

1:53:09 so much of that was enabled by unique

1:53:12 cyber capabilities that we need to stay ahead on.

1:53:15 And so this, recognizing future adversaries could have more

1:53:18 capabilities and more sophistication both on offense and defense,

1:53:22 uh, this this funds it properly.

1:53:24 And I think we put a commander

1:53:25 in charge there who's who's who's in General Rudd,

1:53:29 who is infusing a war-fighting mindset into that place

1:53:32 and ensuring we're we're competing not just inside

1:53:34 the military but also for the best civilian

1:53:36 talent to come into into Cyber Command as well.

1:53:38 Quite important.

1:53:39 And Secretary Heck, since I hate to keep picking on you,

1:53:42 but the Collaborative Combat Aircraft Program is one

1:53:45 of the Department's most significant

1:53:46 investments in this next-generation autonomous power.

1:53:49 Can you discuss how the Department is approaching

1:53:50 the integration of these autonomous aircraft alongside crewed platforms

1:53:54 and how the program fits in your broader effort

1:53:56 to field affordable mass and strengthen deterrence in the Indo-Pacific?

1:54:02 I can share some of it and but not all

1:54:04 of it because a lot of that is is classified,

1:54:06 but it is part of the future of how we will fight and and a way in which we

1:54:11 plan to stay far ahead of adversaries and create more

1:54:14 dilemmas for them than I think they even imagine today.

1:54:17 Thank you very much.

1:54:18 I yield back, Mr.

1:54:19 Chairman.

1:54:19 Uh, thanks, the gentleman.

1:54:20 I recognize Ms.

1:54:21 McCollum for any closing comments.

1:54:23 Thank you, Mr.

1:54:24 Chairman.

1:54:24 I'll be submitting some questions for the record

1:54:26 on behalf of our representative Capter.

1:54:29 Uh, last year the President requested the first trillion-dollar defense budget.

1:54:33 Congress provided uh,

1:54:35 over $150 billion in reconciliation and $903 billion in discretionary spending.

1:54:42 I continue and I think you heard from many of us up here that uh,

1:54:45 mandatory funding for defense is not a great idea.

1:54:49 We should avoid it at all costs.

1:54:51 The budget request for this upcoming fiscal

1:54:53 year has grown to 1.5 trillion dollars.

1:54:56 It's a 50% increase.

1:54:58 But the Department doesn't seem to have enough

1:55:00 to cover its budget holes here in the Department.

1:55:02 I'm going to give you uh, two example two examples.

1:55:05 One is reprogramming.

1:55:07 Um, just the National Guard alone has $600 million of reprogramming.

1:55:12 None of their missions were budgeted for and now we're

1:55:15 being asked to now you need to move money around.

1:55:18 You're asking us to move your money around to cover that.

1:55:21 Um, that was money that was approved for other purposes.

1:55:24 So creates a hole.

1:55:25 The Army submitted a request to to move

1:55:28 nearly $1 billion around to fill personnel shortfalls.

1:55:31 The Navy has $907 million hole it needs to cover for its personnel.

1:55:36 So those are those are problems and this is

1:55:38 why we want things baked into the base bill.

1:55:41 Um, and then when it comes to the supplemental,

1:55:44 the Iran war has cost Americans at least now if I'm if I've got it right, Mr.

1:55:49 Hurst, $29 billion to date without a lot

1:55:52 of things haven't been accounted for yet.

1:55:54 And the department's requesting more money

1:55:56 for munitions outside of the base budget.

1:55:58 So bottom line, I I want your takeaway message to be I'm deeply concerned

1:56:03 that the department can't seem to manage

1:56:05 $1 trillion that Congress provided last year.

1:56:07 So gentlemen, we need information.

1:56:11 We mark our bill up on June 11th.

1:56:14 And we need to be able to justify to do

1:56:17 our fiduciary responsibility to the taxpayers

1:56:20 any increased funding that you seek.

1:56:22 So we expect the information that we've been asking

1:56:24 for our munitions and supplemental requests as soon as possible.

1:56:28 I would say by the end of next week.

1:56:31 So I thank you all for being here and Mr.

1:56:33 Chairman, we watched some of the other hearings.

1:56:36 This is the way especially hearing should be

1:56:38 conducted especially when it's dealing with international defense.

1:56:41 When we ask people to put their lives on the line.

1:56:43 I thank everyone for a respectful hearing, but we need the information, Mr.

1:56:47 Secretary.

1:56:48 I yield back.

1:56:50 Thank the gentle lady and that's something we are going

1:56:51 to agree with the other side is that we sooner is better.

1:56:55 It's makes my job easier and in end of the day it makes your job easier, Mr.

1:56:58 Secretary.

1:57:00 If we can get the information both on the base budget and on the supplemental.

1:57:05 Uh just as a comment that Ed the case

1:57:09 was making about some of the cost on this thing.

1:57:11 I hope the Kuwaitis are going to come up with the money

1:57:14 for those three F-15s that we lost and uh that's a considerable amount of money.

1:57:20 But I wanted to thank the Secretary and the General

1:57:22 Cain for answering questions before the subcommittee today.

1:57:25 I look forward to continuing to work with you

1:57:27 as we move forward uh with the fiscal year '27

1:57:30 appropriations process and uh we can fund the men

1:57:34 and women who serve us well in the United States military.

1:57:36 With that, we're adjourned.