Defense Secretary and Joint Chiefs Chair Testify Before Congress

[0:02] We are meeting today to review the Pentagon's FY27 budget request. [0:07] Each year, the budget presentation gives us the opportunity to take a hard look at the threats we face and our ability to deter and defeat them. [0:16] It helps us decide on a level of investment that will actually secure our homeland and protect our interests across the globe. [0:25] Here are the facts that underlie this year's budget request. [0:27] We are confronting an unprecedented global threat environment with multiple adversaries working together to undermine our security and that of our allies. [0:38] They are building alliances and supporting each other with drones, munitions, missile technology, and energy supplies. [0:46] And China is leading the charge against us. [0:49] As you can see from this graphic, 25 years ago, the PLA was just a defensive force with little ability to project power beyond their borders. [1:00] Today, the PLA is a modernized military force capable of projecting power well into the Pacific. [1:08] Their rapid military buildup has delivered thousands of new ships, subs, missiles. [1:13] We completed a productive classified session down in the skiff, and now we will begin the public portion of this hearing. [1:20] I welcome back Secretary Hegseth, General Cain, and our Acting Comptroller, Mr. Jay Hurst. [1:26] I thank all of them, including their families, for their service. [1:30] For the dozens of Americans that regularly watch our hearings, my next remarks will be no surprise. [1:37] But for new viewers, I want to reiterate some context from our remarks. [1:41] I've said this at almost every hearing. [1:45] We live in the most dangerous security environment since World War II. [1:50] Every uniformed officer who has come before this committee has agreed with that statement. [1:56] First and foremost, we're locked in a competition with Xi Jinping and the Chinese Communist Party. [2:02] The competition is high stakes, and it is about whether this will be an American-led century [2:09] or a century defined by authoritarian, autocratic regimes that care little for the needs of their citizens [2:18] or those in neighboring countries. [2:19] The Chinese Communist Party has accelerated its historic military buildup [2:24] and its predatory economic practices against Americans and countries the world over. [2:30] Xi Jinping leads not only China, but also an axis of aggressors. [2:35] This growing alliance cannot be denied. [2:39] It includes China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea. [2:43] They're united around this goal, to oppose America's interests [2:48] and the interests of other like-minded democratic countries across the globe. [2:53] Vladimir Putin's war of choice in Ukraine has now entered its fifth year. [2:57] In Putin's objectives, we hear echoes of the imperialistic ambitions of World War II's aggressors, [3:06] including Adolf Hitler. [3:09] Vladimir Putin has suffered 1.2 million casualties and failed miserably in his military objectives. [3:18] Along the way, he has transformed Russia's economy into one fueled by war, [3:24] raising the prospect of an even more aggressive Moscow for the foreseeable future. [3:29] Most of Iran's leaders are now deceased, but they and those who survived them [3:35] have consistently sought violence against America, Israel, our Gulf allies, and the Iranian people. [3:44] We saw this during the October 7th massacre, during their continued support for Hezbollah and Hamas, [3:52] and in their desire to engage in nuclear blackmail. [3:55] Iran's ayatollahs have consistently represented a threat to American interest. [4:00] Kim Jong-un has joined Mr. Putin's war of aggression. [4:07] He continues a military and nuclear buildup that threatens South Korea, Japan, and the United States. [4:13] Ties have never been closer among these four dictators, among these four dictatorships. [4:19] They support each other's aggressive endeavors. [4:23] They prop each other up financially, and they scheme to undermine America's objectives. [4:29] We should expect them to continue this behavior. [4:32] This context plays out across every dimension of national power, the economy, technology, diplomacy, and more. [4:40] But today we're here to talk about the military dimension of this competition. [4:45] These regimes have regularly tried to take force, take by force, [4:50] what they cannot secure through the political process. [4:53] For that reason, we must be ready to deter conflicts, and, if necessary, to win them. [5:02] President Trump has used the U.S. military appropriately and effectively for American interests. [5:10] He has viewed our adversaries as a united bloc and has taken action in light of that reality. [5:16] In Operation Absolute Resolve, an associated statecraft, the president removed an aspiring dictator off the board [5:25] and set up Venezuela for a future aligned with democratic interests. [5:31] In Operation Midnight Hammer, he sought to eliminate the Ayatollah's nuclear program. [5:36] When the Ayatollah chose to double down, the president launched Operation Epic Fury. [5:42] In that mission, he has worked to remove the regime's conventional military capabilities [5:47] and force it back to the table for a permanent solution. [5:53] While we all mourn the tragic loss of the 14 service members who've lost their lives in this conflict, [6:00] we do so knowing the world is safer without a nuclear Iran. [6:05] All of these actions are part of a peace-through-strength strategy. [6:08] In this approach, we seek first to avoid war, but we take military action when necessary to achieve U.S. interest. [6:16] And so, Mr. Secretary, I'm pleased that you are here testifying today in support of President Trump's historic $1.5 trillion defense budget request. [6:28] That sum will go a long way toward rebuilding our military capabilities for a generation. [6:33] I should say up front that this may be a long hearing. There's much to discuss. [6:38] This $1.5 trillion request is chock-full of important programs and initiatives that are absolutely necessary [6:47] to secure American interest in the 21st century. [6:51] I think this funding underpins and accentuates three comparative advantages [6:55] the United States possesses over the axis of aggressors. [6:59] The first comparative advantage America enjoys over our adversaries [7:03] is that we have the best innovation and industry in the world. [7:09] So I hope our witnesses today will cover the progress we've made in just the past year rebuilding the American arsenal. [7:17] Last year, our reconciliation bill combined with bipartisan appropriation bills achieved about a $10 defense budget. [7:26] This year's request would represent a near 50% increase. [7:32] Every penny of it should be money well spent, making down payments on crucial transformational capabilities [7:41] such as drone warfare, low-cost munitions, and missile defense. [7:49] Also, last year, Congress and the executive branch achieved historic acquisition reforms. [7:54] Consequently, we're well positioned to make huge gains on efficiency this year and in the years to come, [8:02] making it much more flexible and a more timely process. [8:08] I look forward to discussing how we might accelerate implementation of these actions. [8:14] In particular, I'd like to see the Pentagon do more this year to drive competition in the defense industrial base. [8:22] Competition absolutely drives better outcomes for our service members and taxpayers. [8:30] Of course, our people are the final comparative advantage we have over our adversaries. [8:36] We've enjoyed significant improvements in recruitment, but we need to solidify a merit-based environment [8:41] that fully cares for our personnel. [8:45] I commend you, Mr. Secretary, for your efforts over the past year to do just that. [8:49] That task will never be finished, of course, but we embrace it gladly, and we salute the progress. [8:56] We will always be striving to care for and equip American service members as much as possible. [9:02] I look forward to more work between this committee and the department this coming year. [9:08] With that, I turn to my friend and colleague, Ranking Member Jack Reed. [9:11] Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and Secretary Hegseth, General Cain, Mr. Hurst, welcome. [9:19] And please convey my appreciation, all of our appreciation, to our military service members and defense civilians. [9:27] We owe them our deepest sense of gratitude. [9:31] Mr. Secretary, this is your first public appearance before this committee in nearly a year. [9:35] Since your last public testimony, you and President Trump have unwisely taken the United States to war with Iran. [9:44] You ordered an attack on Venezuela and have directed ongoing illegal boat strike campaign in the Caribbean and Pacific. [9:53] At your direction, our forces have bombed Yemen, Somalia, Iraq, Syria, Nigeria, and Ecuador. [10:01] In the United States, you have deployed thousands of troops to cities like Washington, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Portland to police American citizens. [10:12] And you have personally intervened to end the careers of dozens of military leaders without explanation. [10:19] These actions will have significant and long-term consequences. [10:23] Now, you appear before us to ask for a $1.5 trillion budget, a 45% increase above last year. [10:35] I must say I'm skeptical, and such a request demands intense scrutiny. [10:42] 61 days ago, President Trump unilaterally began the war in Iran. [10:47] He had no coherent strategy. [10:49] He refused to make a case to the American people or consult Congress. [10:54] He failed to present any evidence of an immediate threat, and he ignored the advice of military and intelligence experts who warned him of the consequences. [11:05] Today, our nation is in a war strategic position. [11:09] The Strait of the Moves was open. [11:11] Now it is closed. [11:13] 13 service members have tragically lost their lives, and more than 400 have been wounded. [11:18] We have lost dozens of aircraft, sustained significant damage to our bases in the area, and expended an alarming amount of our missile inventory. [11:29] Morale and readiness across the force, especially among over-deployed units and vessels like the USS Gerald R. Ford aircraft carrier, have suffered. [11:39] Gasoline and fertilizer prices throughout the world have surged. [11:43] American families are bearing the cost of a war they wanted nothing to do with and have gained nothing from. [11:51] And yet, Secretary Hedges, you declared victory a month ago. [11:55] On April 8th, you said, in your words, Operation Epic Fury was a historic and overwhelming victory. [12:02] By any measure, Epic Fury decimated Iran's military and rendered its combat forces ineffective for years to come. [12:11] Let me be clear. [12:14] Tactically, the United States military performance against Iran has been remarkable. [12:19] And I salute the service members who have executed this mission with skill and bravery. [12:24] The problem with your statements, Mr. Secretary, is they are dangerously exaggerated. [12:30] Iran's hotline regime remains in place. [12:33] It still retains stockpiles of enriched uranium. [12:36] And its nuclear program remains viable. [12:39] Iran's military retains enough combat effectiveness to keep the conflict at an impasse. [12:46] Its missiles and drones remain a far greater threat than you have acknowledged. [12:51] And the regime has demonstrated it can effectively control the threat of Hormuz when it chooses. [12:57] Mr. Secretary, I am concerned that you have been telling the president what he wants to hear instead of what he needs to hear. [13:03] Bold assurances of success are a disservice to both the commander-in-chief and the troops who risked their lives based on them. [13:12] Our military has performed heroically, but military force without a signed strategy is a path to long-term defeat. [13:21] I'd like to know what options you are considering now, given the cost from this war and the stalemate President Trump has put us in. [13:28] More broadly, Mr. Secretary, too often you have made dangerous statements that are counterproductive to the mission. [13:37] You boasted about, quote, no stupid rules of engagement, just days after hundreds of Iranian schoolers were tragically killed in a missile strike. [13:47] You have made troubling statements about showing no mercy and no quarter to the Iranians, orders that would constitute war crimes. [13:56] As importantly, while our men and women are fighting and dying overseas, you have focused unduly on your own personal agenda. [14:04] In the past two months alone, you have taken it upon yourself to overhaul the Chaplain Corps, cancel flu vaccine requirements, repeal firearm restrictions on military posts, and bar service members from attending certain universities. [14:19] Just this week, you brought performer Kid Rock to an army base to go for a joyride or an Apache helicopter after dismissing an earlier investigation into the pilots who recklessly chose to hover above his home. [14:35] That runs directly counter to the chain of command and maintaining good order and discipline. [14:41] Most disturbingly, during your tenure, you have fired dozens of our most senior military leaders and personally intervened to block the promotions of many others. [14:51] That is a betrayal of the merit-based system that forms the foundation of our military. [14:58] You are holding out the military's bench of experience and highest-performing senior officers while making young officers wonder if they should continue to serve. [15:08] My colleagues and I have heard from countless service members throughout the ranks, many of whom will be watching right now, who are confused and disturbed by your actions. [15:19] Hopefully, you can explain them today. [15:22] Additionally, this committee expects a fulsome update on Operation Southern Sphere. [15:27] This ongoing campaign against suspected drug trafficking boats has resulted in nearly 200 fatalities. [15:34] The administration has failed to explain the long-term objectives of this mission or provide any evidence of reduced drug flows into the United States. [15:45] I would ask for a credible answer to this most fundamental question, what is the operation actually meant to accomplish? [15:53] Mrs. X-Ray, you are here to promote the President's $1.5 trillion defense budget. [15:59] While this budget provides funding for necessary programs, including shipbuilding and drone manufacturing, [16:06] many other critical programs like barracks repair and aircraft procurement would rely on the passage of a party-line reconciliation bill. [16:16] Further, this budget slashes research and development, provides no funding for Ukraine, [16:22] and includes no funding for losses incurred from the Iran war. [16:26] Yesterday, Mr. Hurst testified that Operation Epic Fury has cost $25 billion. [16:33] If nothing else, that help clarifies that we certainly do not need a supplemental anywhere near $100 billion, much less $200 billion. [16:44] And in this record-breaking budget, there is no pay adjustments for the civilian workforce, and with inflation, that is a pay cut. [16:52] After a year of doge layoffs and a hiring freeze across the department, this is an insult to the 800,000 men and women who support our warfighters every day. [17:04] I cannot imagine a faster way to erode readiness and distract from our abilities to deter our adversaries. [17:12] Ultimately, Mr. Secretary, I believe you are causing lasting harm to the military. [17:17] Like many members of this committee, I had the opportunity and the privilege to serve in the military. [17:24] And every officer knows they are duty-bound to give their best professional advice, [17:29] even if it is not what their superiors want to hear. [17:33] Because when leaders fear to speak honestly, people die, missions fail, wars are lost. [17:40] The Americans' people's trust in our military took 250 years to build. [17:45] You are dismantling it in a fraction of that time. [17:49] And trust, once long, can take generations to rebuild. [17:53] Mr. Secretary, today, I hope you'll take a step forward toward rebuilding the trust that has been lost. [18:01] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [18:02] Mr. Secretary, you are now recognized for your opening statement, sir. [18:09] Well, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Reed, Senators, [18:13] thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of President Trump's historic, as you said, Mr. Chairman, [18:20] $1.5 trillion fiscal year 2027 budget for the Department of War. [18:25] The President's budget request reflects the urgency of the moment, [18:29] addressing both the deferment of longstanding problems, [18:33] as well as positioning our forces for the current and future fights. [18:37] I'm honored to appear alongside General Dan Cain, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, [18:41] and Jay Hurst, our Chief Financial Officer and Comptroller. [18:45] I'd like to start by thanking this committee and Congress for your partnership in securing the investments needed [18:50] for a stronger, prouder, and more secure military. [18:54] Your focus on acquisitions, your focus on efficiency, [18:58] are the reflection in our department as well and in this budget. [19:03] A nation's ability to build, to innovate, and to support the critical needs of its warfighters, [19:08] at speed and at scale, is the foundation upon which its deterrence and survival rests. [19:15] However, upon taking office on January 20th, 2025, [19:19] President Trump inherited a defense industrial base that had been hollowed out [19:23] by years of America-last policies, resulting in a diminished capacity to project strength. [19:31] Under the previous administration, we were offshoring, outsourcing, [19:34] beset by cost overruns, and degraded capabilities. [19:39] But under the leadership of President Trump, our builder-in-chief, [19:43] we are reversing this systemic decay and putting our defense industrial base [19:46] back on a wartime footing. [19:49] Urgency informs everything we do. [19:52] We're rebuilding a military that the American people can be proud of, [19:55] one that instills nothing less than unrelenting fear in our adversaries, [19:59] and inspires historic morale and recruiting in its ranks. [20:05] We fight to win in every scenario. [20:08] The $1.5 trillion budget put forward by the president [20:11] will build upon a previous $1 trillion FY26 top line [20:15] and will continue to reverse the four years of underinvestment [20:19] and mismanagement of the Biden administration. [20:22] The $1.5 trillion budget will ensure that the United States continues to maintain [20:27] the world's most powerful and capable military [20:30] as we grapple with a complex threat environment across multiple theaters. [20:36] Not to mention, the budget also includes a historic troop pay increase, [20:40] 7% for junior enlisted, [20:43] and the budget eliminates all poor or failing barracks. [20:47] Quality of life for our troops is front and center in this budget. [20:51] By supercharging our defense industrial capacity [20:55] and transforming how the department does business, [20:57] we are restoring American commercial dominance [21:00] at a pace unseen in generations, [21:02] transforming the defense industrial base [21:04] from the broken, slow-moving systems of the past. [21:08] We have flipped the Pentagon acquisition process [21:12] from a bureaucratic model to a business model, [21:16] decisively moving from an acquisitions environment [21:18] paralyzed by bureaucratic red tape [21:21] into an outcomes-driven organization [21:23] focused on delivering the most for taxpayer dollars. [21:27] Over the past year, [21:29] through historic multi-year procurement agreements [21:32] that this committee supported, [21:34] we've cut smart business deals [21:36] that have sent unambiguous demand signals to industry [21:40] to build more and build faster. [21:43] The result has been a surge, [21:45] a revitalization of our great American factories [21:49] and a massive reinvestment in the skilled American workers [21:52] who serve as the industrial muscle behind our warriors. [21:56] Further interruptions of our hearing [22:14] will be treated in like manner. [22:17] We appreciate the First Amendment rights of Americans [22:20] to express themselves, [22:23] but disruption of this hearing will not be tolerated. [22:28] So, Mr. Secretary, you may continue. [22:30] I'll briefly provide some concrete high-level metrics [22:33] of what we've accomplished over just the past few months. [22:37] These are announced new facilities and investments [22:39] to support American warfighters. [22:41] The department has helped stimulate [22:42] more than 250 private investment deals [22:45] in 39 states, 180 cities, [22:48] and 150 companies worth more than $50 billion. [22:53] It's resulted in 280 new or expanded facilities, [22:57] more than 18 million new square feet [22:59] of American manufacturing, [23:01] and more than 70,000 new jobs. [23:04] These $50 billion in investments [23:06] in new plants, new assembly lines, [23:09] and new factories are private investments, [23:12] not taxpayer dollars. [23:14] By completely transforming [23:16] our department's business model, [23:18] American companies are investing in America [23:20] with their own dollars, [23:23] a historic demonstration of American manufacturing [23:25] and defense revitalization, [23:27] all with their money, not Uncle Sam's. [23:30] This has never been done before [23:32] and is long overdue from a bureaucratic model [23:35] to a business model. [23:38] These investments equal great things for America, [23:41] for American families and American workers [23:43] to ensure that our warfighters [23:45] have everything they need, [23:46] all American-made. [23:49] Together with the help of the policy updates [23:51] and appropriations passed by Congress, [23:53] President Trump's War Department [23:54] has begun to turn the lights back on [23:57] in our manufacturing towns across this country, [23:59] forging a lethal arsenal of freedom. [24:03] Every policy we pursue, [24:05] every budgetary item we request, [24:06] serves to ensure that this department [24:08] remains laser-focused [24:09] on increasing lethality [24:11] and survivability [24:12] from the front lines to the factory floor. [24:15] This is a historic budget, [24:17] as you said, Mr. Chairman. [24:19] This is a fiscally responsible budget, [24:22] and this is a warfighting budget. [24:25] Speaking of warfighting, [24:26] the topic of Iran, I'm sure, [24:28] will come up often today, [24:30] which I welcome. [24:31] I look forward to sharing [24:32] the incredible success of our military effort, [24:35] achieved in a matter of weeks. [24:38] President Trump has the courage, [24:40] has had, unlike other presidents, [24:42] to ensure that Iran never gets a nuclear weapon [24:45] and that their nuclear blackmail never succeeds. [24:50] We have the best negotiator in the world, [24:52] driving a great deal. [24:54] Unfortunately, as I said yesterday, [24:57] and I'll say it again today, [24:58] the biggest adversary we face at this point [25:02] are the reckless naysayers [25:04] and defeatist words of congressional Democrats [25:06] and some Republicans, [25:09] defeatists from the cheap seats [25:11] who two months in [25:12] seek to undermine the incredible efforts [25:15] that have been undertaken [25:16] and the historic nature [25:18] of taking on a 47-year threat [25:20] with the courage no other president has had [25:23] to great success [25:24] and great opportunity [25:26] for preventing Iran [25:27] from having a nuclear weapon. [25:30] Despite this, [25:31] under President Trump, [25:32] we are restoring the unbreakable might [25:33] of American manufacturing. [25:36] We're providing for our warfighters [25:37] and we are putting the people [25:38] and interests of this country first. [25:42] May Almighty God continue to watch over our troops [25:45] wherever they are [25:46] and may we honor the legacy [25:48] of those brave Americans [25:49] that we have lost. [25:52] This is our sacred mission [25:53] and this is what we will continue [25:55] to execute on. [25:57] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [25:57] Thank you for that statement, [25:58] Mr. Secretary General King. [26:00] You're recognized. [26:01] Thank you, Chairman Wicker, [26:03] Ranking Member Reed, [26:04] members of the committee [26:05] and your staff [26:06] who we never get to say thanks to. [26:08] Thanks for having me today. [26:10] I'm honored to be here [26:11] alongside the Honorable Pete Hegseth [26:13] and the Honorable Jay Hurst [26:14] to testify [26:15] on the President's fiscal [26:16] 2027 budget. [26:19] I'm grateful for the opportunity [26:21] to testify today [26:22] and I'm thankful [26:23] for your continued partnership [26:24] in support of our warfighters [26:26] defending the homeland [26:28] and our interests [26:29] around the world. [26:30] It's a privilege [26:31] to speak with you today [26:32] about the foundation [26:34] of America's strength, [26:36] the 2.8 million members [26:37] of our joint force [26:38] and I am continually inspired [26:41] by the soldiers, sailors, [26:43] airmen, marines, [26:45] guardians, coast guardsmen [26:46] and civilians [26:47] standing the watch [26:49] for the nation [26:50] supported always [26:51] by their families. [26:52] They could have chosen [26:53] a much easier path [26:55] any other path [26:56] but they volunteered [26:57] for a life of purpose [26:59] and passion and service [27:01] and every single day [27:02] they rise to meet [27:03] the nation's challenges [27:04] from combat operations [27:07] to critical support roles [27:09] with the courage, [27:11] tenacity and grit [27:12] that keeps our nation [27:13] strong and secure. [27:15] I would also like [27:16] to express [27:17] my deep gratitude [27:19] for the 39 members [27:21] of the joint force [27:23] who've passed [27:24] in operations, [27:25] combat and training [27:27] during my time [27:28] as the chairman [27:29] and specifically highlight [27:31] the 14 who've passed [27:33] in Operation Epic Fury. [27:35] The secretary and I [27:36] are deeply grateful [27:37] for each of them [27:38] and their families [27:39] and their names [27:40] will never be forgotten. [27:43] As the chairman, [27:44] my duty is to ensure [27:45] our civilian leadership [27:46] has a comprehensive range [27:49] of military options [27:50] and the associated risks [27:52] required to make [27:54] the nation's hardest [27:55] and most complex decisions. [27:58] I owe the president, [27:59] the secretary [28:00] and the Congress [28:01] the truth at every turn [28:02] and my blueprint [28:04] for this role [28:05] has always been [28:06] that of General George C. Marshall. [28:09] His firm commitment [28:10] to civilian control [28:11] and nonpartisan [28:13] and a nonpartisan military [28:15] remains my constant standard [28:17] and I strive [28:18] to emulate his candor [28:20] delivering the facts [28:21] leaders need to hear [28:23] not always what they want to hear [28:25] and once a decision is made [28:27] executing it [28:28] with the absolute dedication [28:30] while keeping the joint force [28:32] precisely where it should be. [28:34] That's the demand [28:35] of our profession. [28:36] As I sit before you today [28:38] representing our incredible [28:39] joint force, [28:40] I want to emphasize [28:42] my commitment [28:42] to this committee [28:43] and to the Congress. [28:45] I will always follow [28:46] General Marshall's [28:47] steadfast example [28:48] by providing clear [28:50] and candid [28:51] nonpartisan military advice [28:53] working together [28:54] to ensure the military [28:55] remains squarely focused [28:57] on one thing [28:58] being prepared [28:59] to deter [29:00] and if called upon [29:01] fight [29:02] and win our nation's war [29:04] and that is our mission. [29:05] America's joint force [29:07] is operational [29:08] at its core purpose-built [29:10] for the realities [29:11] in a complex world. [29:13] We're organized, [29:14] trained, [29:15] and equipped [29:15] to execute [29:16] the most demanding missions [29:18] across the globe [29:19] with unrivaled precision. [29:21] And over the past year, [29:23] our war fighters [29:24] have consistently demonstrated [29:26] exactly what it means [29:28] to be the most capable [29:29] and most professional [29:31] force on Earth. [29:33] Our shared goal [29:35] is to ensure [29:36] the joint force [29:37] remains the strategic, [29:40] sustains the strategic initiative [29:42] and advantage [29:43] and ability [29:44] to project power [29:45] to respond [29:46] to the global challenges [29:47] on our nation's terms. [29:50] During Operation Rough Rider, [29:52] Midnight Hammer, [29:53] Southern Spear, [29:55] Absolute Resolve, [29:56] and Epic Fury, [29:57] the joint force [29:58] executed globally integrated [30:00] missions [30:01] alongside [30:01] our interagency [30:03] and international partners. [30:05] And once our leaders [30:06] made a decision, [30:07] our forces demonstrated [30:09] the unmatched ability [30:10] to seamlessly synchronize [30:12] actions and activities [30:13] from the seabed [30:15] to cislunar space. [30:17] We're able to accomplish [30:18] these complex things [30:20] that we are asked to do [30:21] because we draw [30:22] from a deep reservoir [30:24] of training, [30:26] professionalism, [30:27] and commitment. [30:28] Our operational tempo [30:29] is high, [30:30] but we're designed [30:31] to sustain it, [30:33] rebuilding readiness [30:34] every day, [30:35] training professionals [30:36] every day, [30:37] and sharpening our edge [30:38] every day. [30:39] And I am incredibly proud [30:41] of this joint force team [30:43] and the leaders [30:44] at every echelon [30:45] who command it. [30:46] As the chairman said, [30:49] we are living [30:49] in a complex environment. [30:51] Today, [30:52] I look forward [30:52] to discussing [30:53] how we can sustain [30:54] America's military advantage. [30:56] And I know [30:57] this committee recognizes [30:58] the challenges [30:59] and the urgency [31:00] in the environment [31:01] that we face. [31:02] We're operating [31:03] in delicate [31:04] and dangerous times [31:06] where risk is scaling. [31:08] And the complexity [31:09] of the modern battlefield [31:11] demands America's [31:13] constant adaptation, [31:15] innovation, [31:15] and partnership [31:16] with Congress. [31:18] As a joint force, [31:19] we're up to the challenge. [31:20] We're built [31:21] for this environment. [31:22] However, [31:22] our continued success [31:24] is not guaranteed [31:26] by our past achievements. [31:29] We must continue [31:29] to be forward-looking [31:30] and innovate together [31:32] with the Congress. [31:33] To drive the pace of change [31:35] and maintain our superiority [31:37] requires timely, [31:39] predictable, [31:40] and sustained investment. [31:42] And the resources [31:43] we're going to discuss today [31:44] are critical [31:45] to modernizing [31:47] the joint force [31:47] and ensuring [31:48] whatever threats [31:50] might emerge, [31:51] we are prepared [31:51] to defeat them, [31:53] to protect our interests [31:54] and defend the nation [31:55] and win. [31:56] This president's budget [31:58] for 2027 supports [32:00] the secretary [32:01] and the department's goal [32:02] of reinvigorating, [32:04] recharging [32:04] the defense industrial base [32:06] and the national industrial base, [32:08] enhancing our readiness [32:09] and securing [32:10] our military advantage [32:12] to ensure [32:13] that our war fighters [32:14] are properly armed, [32:16] globally integrated, [32:18] and ready [32:18] while always taking care [32:20] of our people. [32:21] And that is what truly [32:22] sets America's joint force [32:24] apart from each other, [32:26] especially the 1.8 million members, [32:29] enlisted members [32:30] of our joint force. [32:32] It is them, [32:33] the character, [32:34] the competence [32:34] of that force [32:36] that transforms [32:36] our capabilities [32:38] into a decisive advantage. [32:41] And our enlisted force [32:42] is represented today [32:44] by the senior enlisted [32:45] advisor to the chairman, [32:48] United States Navy [32:49] Fleet Master Chief [32:50] Dave Isom [32:51] sitting behind me, [32:52] a teammate [32:53] who I greatly appreciate [32:54] and many of you [32:55] on this committee [32:56] know from his time [32:57] in the Indo-Pacific. [32:59] While we face [33:00] dynamic and dangerous times, [33:03] I have absolute trust [33:05] and confidence [33:05] in the extraordinary [33:07] men and women [33:08] within our joint force [33:09] who every day [33:11] execute the missions [33:12] we ask them to, [33:13] quietly and with precision. [33:15] And coupled with [33:16] the American spirit [33:18] to outthink, [33:19] outcompete, [33:20] and relentlessly innovate, [33:22] we will maintain [33:23] our decisive edge, [33:25] but doing so requires [33:26] your continued partnership. [33:28] We stand ready today [33:29] to answer the nation's call. [33:31] I humbly ask [33:32] that as we're here today [33:33] in this hearing, [33:34] we remember those [33:36] deployed service members [33:37] who are out there right now [33:39] doing our nation's work. [33:40] And may we always forget [33:42] or remember our fallen [33:44] and never forget them [33:45] or their families [33:46] who continue to show us [33:48] what courage looks like. [33:50] Thank you for your [33:51] enduring support [33:51] and I look forward [33:52] to your questions. [33:53] Thank you very much, General. [33:54] We appreciate your service. [33:56] Let's jump right in. [33:57] Secretary Hegseth, [33:58] let's talk about [33:59] the money from [34:01] Reconciliation 1.0 [34:03] last year. [34:05] There have been some [34:05] complaints about the speed, [34:08] but not everything we hear [34:10] is actually accurate. [34:11] How much of the $154 billion [34:14] from Reconciliation [34:16] has the Pentagon [34:17] put on contract? [34:21] My understanding, [34:22] Mr. Chairman, [34:22] first, I'd like to say [34:24] what an important vehicle [34:25] Reconciliation was for us [34:26] and how it gave us a chance [34:28] coming out of FY25 [34:30] to advance the president's priorities, [34:31] whether it's drone dominance, [34:33] Golden Dome for America, [34:34] shipbuilding, [34:35] the defense industrial base. [34:36] It was a critical vehicle [34:37] for us. [34:38] The number you're looking for [34:39] is about what I'm looking at, [34:41] about $26 billion right now. [34:42] But we've got the floodgates [34:44] about to open [34:45] and apply to those priorities. [34:47] Okay. [34:47] So, unfortunately, [34:50] you're starting a bit late [34:51] through no fault of your own [34:53] because the money [34:54] was not sent timely [34:56] by the Office of Management [34:57] and Budget [34:58] to the department [34:58] until last month. [35:00] That's over and done with, [35:02] but it should be mentioned. [35:03] Mr. Secretary, [35:04] where are we [35:05] on the obligation rates [35:08] as far as [35:10] a normal appropriation bill? [35:13] Are we a little behind, [35:14] a little ahead, or what? [35:16] I would say [35:16] probably a little bit behind [35:18] as it pertains [35:19] to reconciliation, [35:20] but part of that is, [35:21] as you know, [35:22] this is a new funding vehicle [35:23] for the department. [35:25] And twofold. [35:26] One, [35:26] you've got to make sure [35:27] you do it right [35:27] and do it in a fiscally [35:28] responsible way [35:29] in conjunction [35:30] with the Congress [35:30] to ensure that we meet [35:31] congressional intent. [35:33] But also that [35:34] we've been using it [35:35] to energize our ability [35:36] to exercise new pathways, [35:38] to get at problems [35:39] in different [35:40] and more dynamic ways [35:41] that don't get stovepiped [35:42] or stuck in the bureaucracy. [35:44] So, yes, [35:44] there's been some delays, [35:47] but ultimately, [35:48] I think it's all goodness [35:49] on the other side, [35:50] given the new nature [35:52] of this funding vehicle. [35:53] Right, yes, [35:54] and things have been [35:56] done differently [35:57] and we appreciate that. [35:58] But, Mr. Secretary, [35:59] will you commit to us [36:01] that you'll keep [36:02] the committee informed [36:03] frequently of your efforts [36:04] to get all this money [36:05] out the door [36:06] so our industrial base [36:08] can start building [36:09] as you have described [36:11] in this new flexibility [36:12] that we provided them? [36:14] Absolutely. [36:16] And you mentioned [36:17] a few things [36:18] in reconciliation [36:21] that you think [36:22] have been game [36:24] game changers. [36:26] We've, [36:27] I do, [36:29] I don't think [36:30] we've talked enough [36:30] about some of the game changers. [36:32] For years, [36:33] we've failed [36:34] to take action [36:34] on rebuilding [36:36] America's drone industrial base [36:38] and critical mineral [36:40] supply chains. [36:42] After the last reconciliation bill [36:44] and the National Defense Authorization Act, [36:47] we're in a very different position [36:48] on drones [36:49] and critical mineral supply chains, [36:53] are we not? [36:55] Very much so. [36:56] Mineral supply chains, drones, [36:58] we went from Jyetta 401 [36:59] to an autonomous warfare group. [37:01] We're looking at the concept [37:02] of a subunified command [37:03] and you're looking at $54 billion [37:06] in the FY27 budget [37:08] dedicated to drone dominance. [37:10] UAS, counter UAS, [37:12] ensuring we can scale [37:13] not just exquisite drones, [37:15] but also the attributable ones [37:16] that are proliferating [37:17] on the battlefield today. [37:18] We need to be ahead. [37:20] Are there any other initiatives [37:21] from last year's bill [37:22] that you want to point out? [37:25] And you only have [37:26] a minute and a half. [37:27] No, the investment [37:28] in Golden Dome for America, [37:29] the ability to get running on that, [37:30] and we are on schedule [37:31] to deliver capabilities [37:33] inside this administration. [37:35] Minerals, [37:36] ensuring up supply chains [37:37] on minerals. [37:37] The Office of Strategic Capital, [37:39] which its ability to loan [37:41] gives 10x to new entrants [37:44] into the department, [37:45] the opportunity to fund things [37:47] that wouldn't normally [37:47] meet the threshold. [37:49] for the department, [37:49] but give them the running room [37:50] to invest in those capabilities, [37:53] and we've already seen fruit [37:53] from that as well. [37:54] And briefly, General Cain, [37:56] there's no question [37:56] that Vladimir Putin's Russia [37:59] is taking serious action [38:02] to undermine our efforts [38:04] for success in Iran. [38:06] Is there any question about that? [38:09] Senator, [38:10] I think there's actions [38:12] and activities that are mindful [38:13] of the hearing room we're in, [38:15] but there's definitely [38:16] some action there. [38:17] Thank you very much. [38:19] Senator Reid, [38:21] you're recognized. [38:23] Thank you very much, [38:26] Mr. Chairman. [38:27] Mr. Secretary, [38:29] you recently fired [38:30] the Honorary Chief of Staff, [38:31] General Randy George, [38:33] who's one of the most distinguished [38:34] and decorated officers [38:35] of this generation. [38:37] General George's nomination [38:40] came before us. [38:42] We reviewed it thoroughly, [38:43] and we concurred. [38:44] Why did you fire General George? [38:49] Well, as I did then, [38:51] and I'll say now, [38:52] we thank General George [38:53] for his service. [38:55] And out of respect to him [38:56] and other officers, [38:57] we never talk about the nature [38:58] of why certain officers [39:01] are asked to step down. [39:03] But we all serve [39:04] at the pleasure of the president. [39:05] And ultimately, [39:06] my view in coming [39:08] into this department, [39:09] as I stated in my confirmation hearing, [39:11] was to change the culture [39:13] of the department. [39:14] And it's ultimately challenging [39:15] to change the culture [39:17] of a department [39:18] with the same people [39:19] who are a part of [39:20] or in that department. [39:21] So I have made many changes [39:22] with General Officers. [39:25] We will continue to make changes [39:26] as necessary [39:27] with General Officers. [39:28] And they will be in keeping [39:29] with the trajectory [39:30] of where we would like [39:30] to take the department. [39:32] But it doesn't take away [39:33] from the service of those. [39:34] And I think you will note [39:36] that every officer [39:37] that's been asked to leave [39:39] has been treated with respect. [39:42] Interesting. [39:43] Of the two dozen officers [39:46] that you have found, [39:46] identified for reasons [39:48] unrelated to performance, [39:50] since you have not indicated [39:51] any cause, [39:53] 60% are black or females. [39:56] Now, did the president direct you [39:58] to single out female [40:00] and black officers [40:01] to be dismissed? [40:05] Senator, of course not. [40:07] And as we've emphasized [40:08] at this department [40:09] from the beginning, [40:10] the only metric is merit. [40:13] Members on this committee [40:15] and the previous leadership [40:16] of this department, [40:17] we're focused on social engineering, [40:20] race and gender [40:21] in ways that we think [40:22] were unhealthy for the department. [40:24] Focusing on those things, [40:25] making decisions based [40:26] on those things. [40:27] In President Trump's war department, [40:29] we make decisions based [40:30] on only one thing, merit. [40:32] And that's how we've made [40:33] decisions going forward. [40:35] That's how we've made them [40:35] and that's how we'll make them [40:36] going forward. [40:36] Well, let me go back [40:37] to General George. [40:38] What did he fail [40:40] in terms of his lack of merit [40:42] to continue serving? [40:45] As I've said, [40:47] I don't talk about [40:48] the nature of dismissal [40:49] out of respect [40:50] for these officers. [40:51] But ultimately, [40:52] we want to take the department [40:53] in a particular direction, [40:55] certain services [40:55] in a particular direction. [40:57] And we want leadership [40:58] that's running as fast [40:59] in that direction as possible. [41:00] And in some cases, [41:01] we make changes accordingly, [41:03] but do so out of respect [41:04] to those officers. [41:05] Well, I think that direction [41:06] from your behavior [41:07] is an intense interest [41:10] in Christianity, [41:12] in nationalism, [41:15] and in not recognizing [41:20] the talents of women [41:22] and non-white gentlemen. [41:25] And that's the wrong direction. [41:27] I don't know [41:28] what you're insinuating, [41:29] Senator, [41:29] but I am not ashamed [41:30] of my faith in Jesus Christ. [41:31] Well, you shouldn't be ashamed. [41:33] And if you want to shame me for it, [41:34] go ahead. [41:35] I'm not shaming you, [41:37] but are you critical [41:38] of other faiths? [41:42] I am a believer. [41:42] I'm quite open in that. [41:44] And our department allows [41:45] for a multitude of faiths. [41:46] So I don't know [41:46] what you're suggesting. [41:48] I've heard the likes of things [41:49] that people like you suggest [41:50] to try to smear [41:52] my character [41:52] and I won't give in to it. [41:54] No. [41:57] I'm sorry, Mr. Secretary, [41:59] but broadcasting [42:01] before the national [42:02] religious broadcasters, [42:05] stressing the need [42:06] for more Christianity [42:07] in the military forces, [42:08] doesn't seem like [42:10] a neutral position [42:11] in which you tolerate [42:12] and accept all religions. [42:14] Let me move on. [42:16] The strategic aspects [42:19] of this operation in Iran. [42:22] The president declared [42:23] that we're going [42:25] to destroy their missiles [42:26] and raise their missile industry [42:28] to the ground. [42:30] And after more than 13,000 strikes, [42:32] unclassified assessments [42:34] conclude that Iran retains [42:36] more than 40% [42:37] of its drone arsenal [42:38] and 60% of its ballistic missile launches [42:41] compared with pre-war levels. [42:44] That's one of his objectives. [42:46] The second objective [42:49] was regime change. [42:53] To the great, proud people of Iran, [42:55] I say tonight [42:55] that the hour of your freedom [42:56] is at hand [42:57] and we will finish, [42:59] take over your government. [43:00] Well, when we finish, [43:01] we'll take over your government. [43:02] That has not succeeded. [43:04] And then, [43:05] one of his other things [43:07] is the onset of the war, [43:08] the president said, [43:09] we will ensure that Iran [43:10] does not obtain [43:11] a nuclear weapon. [43:12] military operations in Iran [43:14] have not achieved that goal yet. [43:17] And it also seems to indicate [43:21] that his pronouncements [43:22] about Operation Midnight Hammer [43:24] obliterating the nuclear policy [43:28] and structure of the Iranians [43:30] was false. [43:31] So you have not achieved [43:32] any of the objectives yet [43:33] that the president mentioned. [43:37] Well, in this setting, [43:38] I won't talk about [43:39] the nature of metrics [43:40] which are classified, [43:41] as you know, Senator. [43:42] But I can say that [43:44] looking at the objectives [43:45] we set out to achieve [43:46] from the beginning, [43:47] some of which you laid out, [43:48] our military cap- [43:50] our military objectives [43:51] have been stunningly effective. [43:54] Look, take, for example, [43:55] their defense industrial base. [43:57] They're completely incapable [43:58] at scale at any level [44:00] of reconstituting [44:01] the capabilities you referred to, [44:03] which is a devastating result [44:04] for any country, [44:06] especially one whose ambitions [44:07] are as wide as Iran's. [44:09] So we've put the president [44:11] in a very strong position [44:12] to ensure Iran [44:14] never gets a nuclear weapon. [44:15] That's the takeaway [44:16] that's been underneath [44:17] every single aspect of this. [44:19] For 47 years, [44:20] Iran's trying to blackmail [44:21] its way to a nuclear weapon. [44:23] They were closer than ever before [44:24] because of bad deals [44:25] under previous administration. [44:26] President Trump was willing [44:27] to do something about it [44:28] and not allow [44:30] their conventional missile shield. [44:31] That's the North Korea strategy. [44:33] That's, to be clear, [44:34] what Iran was pursuing. [44:36] Hiding their nuclear ambitions, [44:38] revealing them over time, [44:39] and then building [44:40] a conventional shield of missiles [44:42] so powerful [44:43] that no country [44:44] would challenge them [44:45] for fear of what would happen [44:47] if they unleashed that arsenal. [44:48] Weekend after the 12-day war [44:50] and Midnight Hammer, [44:51] which did obliterate [44:52] their sights, [44:54] President Trump saw an opportunity [44:55] because their ambitions [44:56] continued to ensure [44:57] that umbrella [44:59] of nuclear blackmail [45:00] did not allow them [45:01] to get to a nuclear weapon. [45:03] And the world is safer [45:04] because of his bold [45:05] and historic choice. [45:06] Mr. Secretary, [45:09] I think that's rhetorical [45:11] but not factual. [45:13] Thank you. [45:13] Thank you, Senator Reid. [45:17] Mr. Secretary, [45:19] Mr. Hurst, [45:20] General Cain, welcome. [45:22] Over the last several months, [45:24] I've worked closely [45:25] with some of the new [45:26] direct reporting program managers, [45:28] and I've been encouraged [45:30] by how they're approaching [45:32] the department's [45:33] most complex acquisition systems. [45:37] General White's pulled forward [45:38] the next milestone [45:39] for the Sentinel program [45:41] by at least six months. [45:43] General Gutlein [45:44] has completed [45:45] the initial blueprint [45:46] for the Golden Dome architecture [45:48] and is beginning [45:50] to build it out. [45:51] For years, [45:52] this committee has known [45:53] that we must improve [45:55] our ability [45:55] to defend our homeland [45:57] against a wider variety [45:59] of threats. [46:00] And we finally have a partner [46:02] with the full backing [46:03] of the department [46:04] to lead the charge. [46:07] Mr. Secretary, [46:08] what's the advantage [46:09] of this new type [46:10] of program management structure? [46:14] Well, thank you [46:15] for the question, Senator. [46:16] It's acquisition authority, [46:18] technical authority, [46:20] contracting authority. [46:21] It's consolidating decision-making [46:22] in one place [46:24] under a highly screened, [46:25] highly capable general, [46:27] General White [46:27] and General Gutlein [46:28] who know that terrain [46:30] extremely well [46:30] and understand what mistakes [46:33] have been made in the past [46:34] in programs of that magnitude [46:35] and then are given [46:36] the authority [46:37] to cut through the red tape. [46:39] That's the key. [46:41] Success or failure lands [46:43] with them [46:43] and they know it [46:44] and as a result, [46:45] they're incentivized [46:46] to ensure that program [46:47] and then given every dollar [46:49] and authority needed [46:49] to move it [46:50] as quickly as possible. [46:51] So whether it's Sentinel, [46:52] whether it's F-47, [46:54] whether it's Golden Dome [46:54] for America, [46:55] these critical strategic assets, [46:57] the direct report construct, [47:01] along with Deputy Secretary Feinberg, [47:03] who is a national treasure [47:04] and is changing the way [47:06] we do business [47:06] at this department [47:07] is giving us a chance [47:08] to ensure these critical systems [47:09] are delivered. [47:10] Thank you. [47:11] And General Cain, [47:13] can you give us your thoughts [47:15] on why the Golden Dome received the, [47:18] why they must receive [47:20] that requested $17 billion [47:21] in funding [47:23] for the fiscal year 27? [47:26] Well, Senator, [47:27] it's, as you know, [47:28] it's an essential part [47:29] of our Homeland Security [47:31] layered defense [47:32] and as General Gutlein [47:33] begins to do the work [47:35] that you're asking about [47:37] and, frankly, [47:37] helping to advance, [47:39] you know, [47:39] the insurance around [47:41] that down payment, [47:43] charging the defense industrial base [47:46] with those capital allocations [47:48] will allow them [47:48] to get after it much, much quicker. [47:51] We appreciate the help. [47:52] And if there's a delay [47:53] in that funding? [47:55] Well, hopefully there won't be, [47:57] Senator, [47:57] because we've got a leader [47:59] on that account, [48:00] 24-7, 365, [48:01] but if we do, [48:03] we'll always, [48:04] of course, [48:05] come back [48:05] and talk to the Congress, [48:07] but also figure out [48:08] what has to be true [48:09] to help that constraint [48:12] get removed [48:13] in that production system. [48:15] And that's really [48:15] what we're asking [48:16] these leaders to do [48:17] is to be able to get past [48:19] the theory of constraints. [48:20] Okay, thank you. [48:21] Secretary Hagseth, [48:23] I agree with your statement [48:24] on nuclear deterrence. [48:26] When you said, [48:27] nothing else matters [48:28] if we don't get this right, [48:30] so we will. [48:32] We need a modernized [48:34] nuclear triad [48:35] and NC3 architecture [48:37] that can credibly deter [48:39] multiple adversaries [48:41] instead of an insufficient [48:43] nuclear force structure [48:45] based on fundamentally [48:47] flawed assumptions [48:48] made 16 years ago. [48:51] Our presidents [48:52] must also have [48:53] a more diverse set of options [48:55] so that they can effectively [48:57] manage more complex [48:59] nuclear escalation dynamics. [49:02] So, Mr. Secretary, [49:03] how does this budget request [49:05] achieve those objectives? [49:09] Well, thank you [49:10] for your leadership [49:10] on this issue [49:11] for a very long time. [49:13] First and foremost, [49:14] it invests in it. [49:15] $71 billion [49:16] in our nuclear triad [49:18] and NC3, [49:19] understanding that [49:20] if you get that wrong, [49:21] you get everything else wrong. [49:23] Frankly, [49:23] it's why the Iran effort [49:25] is so important. [49:25] Imagine what the situation [49:27] in the region [49:28] would look like [49:29] if Iran also wielded [49:30] a nuclear weapon [49:31] and the limits [49:32] it would put [49:33] on our capabilities [49:34] in those situations. [49:35] Our adversaries [49:36] have to deal [49:37] with that dilemma [49:37] because of the strength [49:38] of our nuclear triad. [49:40] So that $71 billion [49:41] investment, [49:42] the derpums [49:43] that have been put [49:43] over top of it [49:44] to move those systems left, [49:46] as you acknowledged, [49:47] it's just been a priority [49:50] since we came [49:50] into the building [49:52] and we're funding [49:52] it accordingly. [49:55] And Chairman Cain, [49:57] Secretary Haig-Seth, [49:59] whoever would like [50:00] to answer this, [50:02] should our nuclear [50:03] command control [50:04] and communication systems [50:06] like the SAOC [50:07] be given the same level [50:09] of priority [50:10] as Congress considers [50:12] the department's [50:13] budget request [50:14] as our triad? [50:19] I think so, [50:20] but I defer to the chairman. [50:22] Yes, ma'am. [50:23] We've got to be able [50:23] to see to anything. [50:25] So, yes, ma'am. [50:26] Thank you. [50:28] Senator Shaheen, [50:29] you are recognized. [50:30] Thank you, madam chair. [50:32] Um, Secretary Haig-Seth, [50:35] Congress enacted [50:36] $400 million [50:37] to provide security [50:39] assistance to Ukraine [50:40] in January. [50:40] Now, the committee [50:42] received a notification [50:43] just yesterday [50:44] confirming only [50:46] that the funding [50:47] would go toward Ukraine. [50:49] It contained [50:50] no details [50:51] about the type [50:51] of equipment, [50:52] no delivery timelines, [50:53] nothing that is typically [50:55] included [50:56] in these notifications. [50:57] and when asked [50:58] about the delay [50:59] in funding, [51:00] the committee [51:01] was told [51:01] that Bridge Colby [51:02] was developing [51:03] a spend plan, [51:04] but we've received [51:05] nothing. [51:07] So, when can we expect [51:08] the full spend plan [51:10] for this appropriation? [51:11] And, madam chair, [51:12] can I, [51:13] if this is not all [51:14] already part of the record [51:16] for the committee, [51:17] can I enter it [51:18] into the record? [51:22] We acknowledge [51:23] and are executing [51:24] on the European [51:25] capacity building amount [51:26] of $400 million [51:28] that you referred to. [51:28] Undersecretary Colby [51:30] has done a great job [51:32] looking at options [51:33] and worked very closely [51:35] with our European commander, [51:37] General Grinkowitz. [51:38] So, his requests [51:39] of what makes [51:40] the most sense [51:40] will inform [51:41] what ultimately [51:42] is invested in. [51:44] Well, this notification [51:45] says that UCOM [51:47] coordinated [51:48] on the spend plan [51:49] in March, [51:50] but General Grinkowitz [51:52] told this committee [51:53] on April 16th [51:55] that he had not yet [51:56] been asked to review [51:57] any spend plan [51:58] for this appropriation. [52:00] So, General Cain, [52:02] have you received [52:03] the spend plan [52:03] for funds in Ukraine [52:04] and have you asked [52:06] the UCOM commander [52:06] for his concurrence? [52:11] I do not believe so, [52:12] but I will find out, [52:14] Senator, [52:14] and get back to you [52:15] by the end of the day. [52:16] Thank you. [52:18] And yesterday, [52:19] Mr. Hurst, [52:20] you told the House [52:22] that you needed [52:23] to seek legal review [52:24] to appropriate the funds [52:26] as Congress intended. [52:28] So, can you share with us [52:29] what the nature [52:30] of that legal review is? [52:32] And it seems to me [52:33] the law was pretty clear. [52:35] I saw it. [52:35] It was part of the [52:36] defense appropriations bill [52:39] that we passed in January. [52:41] And, as you know, [52:42] violating congressional intent [52:43] on appropriating funds [52:45] is a violation [52:45] of the Impoundment Control Act. [52:47] So, what's the nature [52:48] of the legal review [52:49] that you have to get? [52:51] Thanks for the question, [52:52] Senator. [52:52] What we're looking at [52:53] is if we could use the funds [52:54] in the same manner as USAI. [52:56] And we had our council [52:57] look at that. [52:58] And so, they provided us [53:00] a legal opinion [53:00] on how the funds [53:01] could be used [53:01] to support European [53:02] capacity building. [53:04] And can you share [53:05] with this committee [53:06] what that legal opinion is? [53:09] Ma'am, I don't have [53:09] a copy of that, [53:10] but we can ask the OGC office [53:11] if they can supply it to you. [53:13] Madam Chair, [53:14] can we ask that [53:15] that legal opinion [53:17] is shared with the committee [53:18] officially? [53:20] Thank you. [53:20] Also, I don't know [53:24] who can answer this, [53:25] but it says that [53:29] consistent with the [53:32] President's priority [53:33] to shift the financial burden [53:35] of Ukraine support [53:36] to European partners, [53:37] the United States [53:38] will seek commensurate [53:40] financial contributions [53:41] via the prioritized [53:44] Ukraine requirements list [53:45] or PERL [53:46] from the European partners [53:48] for this program. [53:49] So, what's the justification [53:52] for using PERL [53:54] when there's $400 million [53:55] in appropriated funds? [53:58] Can somebody answer? [53:59] PERL is a reflection [54:00] of the President's priority [54:01] and the belief [54:02] that any weapons [54:03] that are supplied [54:03] are paid for [54:04] by European partners [54:06] and used as they see fit, [54:07] whether it's Ukraine [54:08] or somewhere else. [54:09] But that was not [54:09] the intent of Congress [54:11] in providing that $400 million. [54:13] As I understand, [54:13] the PERL program, [54:15] the Europeans purchase [54:17] those weapons [54:18] from the United States [54:20] and they pay for them. [54:21] but this appropriation [54:23] was $400 million [54:24] that Congress expected [54:26] to be provided [54:27] to Ukraine, [54:29] not paid for [54:30] by the Europeans, [54:32] but provided [54:33] from the United States [54:34] to support Ukraine. [54:36] So, again, [54:38] I don't understand [54:39] what the justification [54:40] is for using PERL [54:41] when that's not the intent [54:43] that Congress provided. [54:45] We're following the intent [54:47] of European capacity building [54:49] but at the same time [54:50] recognizing that [54:51] wherever PERL [54:52] can be utilized [54:53] so that the Europeans [54:54] contribute to that fight [54:56] per the burden-sharing approach [54:57] that this President takes [54:58] is important. [54:59] But that was not [54:59] congressional intent. [55:00] And that's what I'm asking you. [55:02] Why are you using PERL [55:04] to do something [55:06] that Congress intended [55:07] to go directly to Ukraine? [55:09] Well, we look forward [55:10] to working with you on that. [55:12] Mr. Hurst, [55:13] can you answer that? [55:14] What was the legal opinion on this? [55:14] Did you ask the attorneys [55:16] if the $400 million [55:18] could be used [55:19] for the PERL program? [55:20] Let's get back to you. [55:22] We'll take it for the record, ma'am. [55:24] Thank you. [55:24] And what portion of the funding [55:26] that's committed [55:27] from the Europeans [55:28] under PERL [55:29] is being used [55:30] to assist Ukraine [55:31] rather than restocking [55:33] our own shelves? [55:34] Can you answer that? [55:36] That's up to Europe. [55:38] Ultimately, [55:39] Europe pays for [55:40] any weapons that we provide [55:42] and they can utilize them [55:43] as they see fit, [55:44] whether it's Ukraine [55:45] or otherwise. [55:47] Thank you, [55:47] Senator Shaheen. [55:49] There have been a number [55:50] of times [55:50] when our witnesses [55:51] have [55:52] stated both [55:54] in the closed hearing [55:55] and up here [55:55] that they will get back to us. [55:57] And we certainly hope [55:58] that will happen [55:59] very expeditiously. [56:02] So thank you very much [56:03] and thank you, [56:04] Senator Shaheen. [56:05] Senator Cotton. [56:06] Thank you, gentlemen, [56:07] for your appearance today. [56:09] Mr. Secretary, [56:10] you provided us [56:11] with a chart here [56:11] entitled [56:12] The Arsenal of Freedom, [56:14] which includes [56:15] a lot of sites [56:16] that you've visited. [56:16] My favorite one [56:17] is down here [56:18] in South Arkansas, [56:20] Camden, [56:20] where you and I [56:21] had a chance to visit [56:22] just a couple months ago, [56:24] highlighting the great work [56:26] that the people there are doing [56:28] to help rebuild [56:29] our arsenal of freedom. [56:33] Thank you, first off, [56:35] for being there [56:35] and for your kind words [56:37] for the workforce [56:38] of the people [56:38] of South Arkansas. [56:39] Isn't it fair to say [56:42] that the war in Iran, [56:45] just like the Ukraine war [56:46] before it [56:48] and still today, [56:49] hasn't caused any challenges [56:51] with our munitions [56:52] the way some of our [56:53] Democratic colleagues would say, [56:55] but it's exposed [56:56] a decades-old problem [56:58] of brittleness [56:59] and fragility [56:59] in our defense industrial base [57:01] before you [57:02] and General Cain [57:03] took over [57:03] and that we're trying [57:04] to address right now. [57:06] In many ways, [57:07] that's precisely [57:08] what we're trying to address. [57:09] We also have a situation [57:10] where President Trump [57:12] rebuilt our military [57:13] in the first term [57:14] and a lot of those munitions [57:15] and a lot of those capabilities [57:17] were sent to Ukraine [57:18] under the previous administration [57:19] to the point [57:20] where when we ask [57:21] our commanders [57:22] or when we look at O plans, [57:23] the answer often is [57:24] that was sent to Ukraine. [57:26] So the recognition [57:27] of those two things [57:28] has, [57:29] as the president gave us [57:30] a charge from day one [57:32] to rebuild [57:33] the arsenal of freedom, [57:34] to fast forward, [57:34] not to provide [57:35] a little bit more [57:36] of each thing, [57:37] but 2x, 3x, [57:38] 4x the number [57:39] of exquisite munitions [57:40] that we need. [57:42] The expenditures [57:42] that we've seen [57:43] under this administration, [57:44] we can account for them [57:45] and we ensure [57:46] that other O plans [57:47] and elsewhere [57:47] are well taken care of. [57:49] So on the munitions front, [57:50] we're in really good shape, [57:51] but we need to accelerate [57:52] and that's exactly what we're doing. [57:53] And I think [57:54] that's an important point [57:55] you make [57:55] is that we're not just [57:57] trying to fill a hole [57:58] that was created [57:59] by Epic Fury [58:00] or by support for Ukraine. [58:02] We're going to fill that [58:03] and then go much beyond that [58:05] for our needs in the future. [58:06] So we're never caught [58:07] where we were [58:08] over the last several years [58:10] with these worries [58:12] about munitions running short. [58:13] Is that right, [58:14] Mr. Secretary? [58:15] That's exactly right. [58:16] The president has charged up [58:17] with not just replacing anything, [58:19] but filling it up, [58:20] as he might say, [58:20] to the tippy top [58:21] and make sure [58:22] that the remainder [58:23] of this term [58:24] and future presidents [58:25] have all the munitions [58:26] they need [58:27] for any level [58:28] of contingencies, [58:29] especially considering [58:29] the dangerous world [58:30] we live in. [58:31] I want to turn now [58:32] to Operation Epic Fury. [58:33] It's been a smashing [58:34] military success. [58:36] Unfortunately, [58:37] we have suffered casualties [58:38] to include soldiers [58:40] killed in the line of action. [58:42] Obviously, [58:43] our military takes [58:44] the greatest steps possible [58:46] to protect our troops, [58:47] whether they are in action [58:49] or whether they are [58:50] on bases in the region. [58:52] No war, though, [58:53] is antiseptic. [58:54] Mr. Secretary, [58:55] could you explain [58:55] some of the steps [58:56] we've taken [58:56] to try to minimize [58:57] to the greatest extent [58:58] we can [58:58] the number of casualties [59:00] we've taken [59:01] in the Middle East? [59:01] First of all, [59:03] every day, [59:05] we live to ensure [59:06] that we follow through [59:06] on the legacy [59:07] of those who gave everything. [59:08] So that's front [59:09] and center for us. [59:10] But I can also say, [59:11] and the chairman [59:11] may want to weigh in, [59:13] from the beginning [59:13] of looking at the possibility [59:15] of this contingency, [59:16] setting the defense [59:17] and ensuring [59:18] that Admiral Cooper [59:19] and everyone [59:20] throughout CENT [59:20] did every possible measure [59:22] they could [59:23] to ensure [59:24] that our troops [59:24] are protected [59:25] and force protection [59:26] was maximized [59:27] was the top priority. [59:28] Moving assets [59:29] to the region, [59:30] we integrated [59:31] our air defenses [59:31] with local Gulf countries [59:34] to ensure [59:34] our shot doctrine [59:35] was maximized, [59:36] whether it's ballistic missiles [59:38] or on drones. [59:39] Flowing in [59:40] the most recent capabilities [59:43] to ensure [59:43] we can intercept drones. [59:45] Moving troops [59:45] off the X. [59:46] I think what people [59:47] mostly don't know [59:49] is that a massive effort [59:50] was undertaken [59:51] before this conflict [59:52] to move as many humans [59:54] off of targets [59:55] to other places [59:56] and maintain [59:57] operational security [59:58] about where they might be [59:59] to minimize the space [1:00:01] with which Iran [1:00:02] could hit. [1:00:03] We always knew [1:00:03] something getting through [1:00:04] was a tragic possibility. [1:00:07] But I can assure you [1:00:08] from our perspective [1:00:09] that was priority number one [1:00:11] as it was Admiral Cooper's [1:00:12] to ensure [1:00:13] that fortification [1:00:13] and missile defenses [1:00:15] were right there [1:00:16] when we went on offense [1:00:17] if we had to. [1:00:19] General Kaine, [1:00:19] do you have anything to add? [1:00:20] Well, in addition [1:00:21] to just again [1:00:22] mourning our fallen [1:00:24] from the 103rd, [1:00:25] what I'll add [1:00:26] to the Secretary's comments [1:00:27] is after every tragic loss, [1:00:29] commanders at every echelon [1:00:31] within our Joint Force [1:00:32] are going to go back [1:00:33] and look at [1:00:34] what was our plan [1:00:36] and what lessons [1:00:36] we can learn from this [1:00:38] so that we protect [1:00:39] and defend [1:00:40] our soldiers, sailors, [1:00:42] and other members [1:00:42] of the Joint Force [1:00:43] the next time. [1:00:44] Thank you. [1:00:45] And I know you do [1:00:46] and I just wanted [1:00:46] to give you the opportunity [1:00:47] to speak to what you've done [1:00:48] to try to prevent [1:00:49] casualties [1:00:50] and minimize them. [1:00:52] Obviously, again, [1:00:52] no war is antiseptic. [1:00:53] One final question. [1:00:54] I understand you've been accused [1:00:55] of lying to the President. [1:00:56] Mr. Hexeth, [1:00:57] have you lied to the President [1:00:58] at all about [1:00:59] what's happening [1:01:00] in Iran or Epic Fury? [1:01:02] Only tell the truth [1:01:03] to the President. [1:01:04] General Kaine, [1:01:04] have you lied to the President [1:01:05] about what's happening [1:01:06] in Iran or Operation Epic Fury? [1:01:08] Never. [1:01:08] I suspected that [1:01:09] would be your answer, [1:01:10] but since you were accused of it [1:01:11] and deep staters [1:01:12] are leaking to the media [1:01:12] about it as well, [1:01:13] I just wanted to give you [1:01:14] a chance to answer [1:01:14] on the record [1:01:15] that, of course, [1:01:16] you've always given the President [1:01:17] a completely accurate picture [1:01:18] of what's happening. [1:01:19] Thank you, gentlemen. [1:01:19] Thank you very much, [1:01:20] Senator Cotton. [1:01:21] Senator Gillibrand [1:01:22] and then Senator Rounds. [1:01:23] Thank you, gentlemen, [1:01:24] for appearing [1:01:25] on the committee, [1:01:26] and thank you [1:01:26] for the closed session [1:01:27] prior to this. [1:01:29] I don't know [1:01:30] if you fully appreciate [1:01:31] how much the American people [1:01:33] do not support this war. [1:01:34] It is an unauthorized war. [1:01:37] Normally, [1:01:37] when you come to Congress, [1:01:38] it's a way [1:01:39] for the American people [1:01:40] to be part of that discussion. [1:01:42] The American people, [1:01:44] particularly in my state of New York, [1:01:47] are upset for a lot of reasons. [1:01:49] First of all, [1:01:50] this war is costing [1:01:50] so much money, [1:01:53] over $25 billion already, [1:01:55] estimates $1 billion a day, [1:01:56] and they're feeling it [1:01:58] every single day [1:01:59] at the gas pump [1:02:00] with higher prices [1:02:01] for both fuel, [1:02:03] for diesel, [1:02:04] for gasoline for their cars. [1:02:05] They're also feeling it [1:02:07] with higher grocery costs [1:02:08] and they're exhausted. [1:02:10] They are truly exhausted. [1:02:12] On top of that, [1:02:14] on top of that, [1:02:15] they have so many grave concerns [1:02:17] about how this war [1:02:19] is being prosecuted. [1:02:20] They read in the paper [1:02:23] that 22 schools have been hit. [1:02:26] They read in the paper [1:02:27] about a girl's school, [1:02:29] hundreds getting killed. [1:02:32] We have a debate going on [1:02:33] in this country about AI, [1:02:36] a serious debate about AI. [1:02:39] And I haven't heard yet from you [1:02:41] that you will not allow AI [1:02:42] to make final targeting [1:02:44] determinations, [1:02:45] even when nuclear weapons [1:02:46] are being used. [1:02:48] That's a huge issue [1:02:49] that we need to discuss. [1:02:51] So I want to start [1:02:52] from the top, [1:02:52] Secretary Hegseth. [1:02:54] Why do you continue [1:02:55] to prosecute a war [1:02:56] that the American people [1:02:57] aren't behind? [1:03:01] First of all, [1:03:02] I appreciate the opportunity [1:03:03] for that closed session [1:03:04] where we had a unsurprisingly [1:03:06] very different discussion [1:03:07] than we have here [1:03:08] with the cameras on. [1:03:09] We support this- [1:03:10] Because my job [1:03:11] is to represent New Yorkers [1:03:13] and I can tell you [1:03:14] when I talk to them [1:03:15] all across my state, [1:03:17] they are furious [1:03:19] and they expect me [1:03:21] to explain to them [1:03:22] why they are furious. [1:03:23] And, Senator, [1:03:24] when I talk to Americans [1:03:25] and especially when I talk [1:03:26] to the troops, [1:03:28] they are grateful [1:03:28] for a president [1:03:29] who has the courage [1:03:30] to take on this threat [1:03:31] after 47 years [1:03:32] of what Iran has done [1:03:33] targeting and killing Americans [1:03:34] and what it would mean [1:03:35] to the world [1:03:36] if Iran's nuclear ambitions [1:03:38] were actually achieved. [1:03:39] So the question I would ask [1:03:41] to you and to others is, [1:03:42] what is the cost [1:03:43] of a nuclear-armed Iran? [1:03:44] What is the cost [1:03:45] to the American people [1:03:46] if the world's most dangerous [1:03:47] regime has a nuclear weapon? [1:03:49] But the truth is, [1:03:50] they don't want war [1:03:51] coming to this shore [1:03:52] and when you do [1:03:53] a decapitation operation, [1:03:54] the likelihood is going [1:03:55] to be exchanged [1:03:57] in the United States. [1:03:58] There's no evidence [1:03:59] that we are safer [1:03:59] because of this war. [1:04:01] We did not have any evidence [1:04:02] that Iran intended [1:04:04] to imminently attack [1:04:05] this country [1:04:05] in any way, shape, or form. [1:04:07] So I disagree [1:04:08] with your assessment [1:04:09] that we are under threat. [1:04:11] Do you not believe them [1:04:12] when they say death to America? [1:04:14] Listen, [1:04:15] our adversaries [1:04:15] use rhetoric all the time. [1:04:18] What I'm concerned about [1:04:19] is we are not safer [1:04:20] and I would just like to know [1:04:22] why you have not sought [1:04:24] the support [1:04:24] of the American people [1:04:26] and three out of five Americans [1:04:27] are against this war today. [1:04:31] I believe we do have [1:04:32] the support [1:04:33] of the American people [1:04:34] and we have briefed regularly [1:04:35] what this mission looks like [1:04:37] and why it's critically important [1:04:38] that we undertake it. [1:04:39] And I would remind you [1:04:40] and this group [1:04:41] that we're two months in [1:04:43] to an effort [1:04:44] and many congressional Democrats, [1:04:46] as I pointed out, [1:04:47] want to declare defeat [1:04:48] two months in. [1:04:49] Iraq took how many years? [1:04:51] Afghanistan took how many years? [1:04:53] And they were nebulous missions [1:04:54] that people went along with. [1:04:56] This is different. [1:04:57] This is a defined mission set [1:04:59] that we have had great success [1:05:00] in pursuing [1:05:01] against a determined enemy [1:05:03] who seeks nuclear weapons. [1:05:05] And I'm proud of the opportunity [1:05:06] to remind the American people [1:05:07] because they believe in it as well [1:05:09] that they can't have it. [1:05:10] You don't care [1:05:11] whether the American people [1:05:13] support this war. [1:05:13] The American people [1:05:14] are quite smart. [1:05:15] They understand [1:05:16] and see through spin. [1:05:17] They know that a regime [1:05:19] that says death to America [1:05:20] that seeks nuclear weapons [1:05:22] and the ability to deliver. [1:05:23] Did they lie about [1:05:24] the range of their missiles? [1:05:25] How much more? [1:05:25] Because I saw a 4,000 kilometer missile [1:05:27] get shot at... [1:05:27] How much more will you ask [1:05:28] the American people [1:05:29] to pay for this war? [1:05:31] Diego Garcia. [1:05:31] Right now, do you want it [1:05:32] a billion dollars a day? [1:05:33] Do you want it two billion dollars a day? [1:05:35] You're asking for $200 billion more [1:05:37] to fund this war [1:05:37] and to make sure we have... [1:05:38] We didn't ask for $200 billion. [1:05:40] I don't know where you got [1:05:41] that number from, Senator. [1:05:42] I think you got it from the news, [1:05:43] which you should be careful [1:05:44] what you read in the news. [1:05:45] Okay, Mr. Hegseth. [1:05:46] Secretary Hegseth. [1:05:47] Here's a few more. [1:05:49] Let's talk about [1:05:50] how you're prosecuting the war. [1:05:52] What is your response [1:05:53] to targeting that has resulted [1:05:55] in the destruction of schools, [1:05:58] hospitals, civilian places? [1:06:00] Why did you cut by 90% [1:06:03] the division that's supposed [1:06:04] to help you not target civilians? [1:06:07] And do you know the impact [1:06:08] of a strategic failure at a war [1:06:10] when you have so many civilian casualties? [1:06:13] You may have tactically [1:06:14] completed a mission well, [1:06:16] but strategically is not meeting [1:06:18] your goals because of the harms [1:06:19] to civilians. [1:06:20] What is the cost of that? [1:06:21] Let's leave time for an answer. [1:06:24] No military, no country [1:06:25] works harder at every echelon [1:06:28] to ensure they protect civilian lives [1:06:29] than the United States military. [1:06:31] And that is an ironclad commitment [1:06:33] that we make, [1:06:34] no matter how, [1:06:35] no matter what systems we use. [1:06:36] Then why did you cut [1:06:36] the department by 90%? [1:06:38] Thank you, Senator Gillibrand. [1:06:40] There'll be other rounds [1:06:41] of questions. [1:06:42] Senator Rounds, [1:06:43] you are now recognized. [1:06:44] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:06:46] First of all, thank you to all of you [1:06:48] for your service to our country. [1:06:50] Let me just allow you to finish [1:06:54] the answer a little bit [1:06:55] with regard to the senator from New York. [1:06:58] Does the United States military [1:07:00] ever target a civilian center? [1:07:05] Well, thank you, Senator. [1:07:06] Unlike our adversaries, [1:07:08] unlike radical Islamists, [1:07:10] unlike those that target civilians [1:07:12] or use civilians as shields, [1:07:15] the United States military [1:07:16] never targets civilians [1:07:18] and puts constructs in place [1:07:20] to ensure that the maximum extent possible, [1:07:23] we do not harm or hit civilians. [1:07:26] Is war a difficult place [1:07:28] with a lot of complexities? [1:07:29] Absolutely right. [1:07:30] But no country does more [1:07:32] and no department does more [1:07:33] than our department. [1:07:34] Do you still have [1:07:35] all the resources necessary [1:07:37] to ensure that every opportunity [1:07:40] to eliminate that as a threat [1:07:43] in terms of that happening? [1:07:44] Do we still have the resources [1:07:46] available in the department [1:07:47] to make sure that we do the best we can [1:07:49] never to hit a civilian target? [1:07:51] Every resource necessary [1:07:53] at every echelon [1:07:54] is available, legal, intel, [1:07:57] and otherwise, [1:07:57] to ensure that we minimize [1:07:59] at every extent possible [1:08:00] civilian casualties. [1:08:01] And the suggestion was made [1:08:02] that somehow AI might be used [1:08:05] without a human in the loop, [1:08:06] which is a classic anthropic talking point, [1:08:09] which is half of what we talked [1:08:10] about previously. [1:08:12] There is a human in the loop [1:08:13] on decisions that are made. [1:08:15] And the suggestion otherwise [1:08:16] is to suggest that somehow [1:08:18] AI is running targeting. [1:08:20] Thank you. [1:08:23] Right now, part of what we're [1:08:25] also talking about [1:08:26] is not just are we engaged right now [1:08:28] in terms of trying to eliminate [1:08:30] the threat from Iran [1:08:31] in terms of being [1:08:32] a nuclear armed country, [1:08:33] but we've also got staring [1:08:35] with us as well, [1:08:36] the fact that we have [1:08:36] an ongoing principal threat [1:08:38] with regard to a pacing threat [1:08:40] with China. [1:08:41] The dual capable B-21 Raider [1:08:44] will be a critical part [1:08:45] of both our conventional [1:08:47] and our nuclear defense [1:08:49] against China and Russia. [1:08:50] As you know, [1:08:51] the Air Force's program [1:08:52] of record includes plans [1:08:53] to procure 100 B-21s, [1:08:56] but many national security experts [1:08:58] and leaders, [1:08:59] including STRATCOM Commander [1:09:00] Admiral Corral [1:09:01] and Indo-PACOM Commander [1:09:03] Admiral Paparo, [1:09:05] are calling for a greater number [1:09:07] of B-21s. [1:09:07] Admiral Paparo testified [1:09:09] here last week [1:09:10] that he would favor [1:09:11] buying 200 B-21s. [1:09:14] Secretary Hegseth [1:09:15] and Chairman Cain, [1:09:18] could you speak [1:09:18] to the progress [1:09:19] and the importance [1:09:20] of the B-21 program? [1:09:21] And if you agree [1:09:22] with the growing sentiment [1:09:24] that the U.S. needs [1:09:25] to revisit the B-21 program [1:09:26] of record [1:09:27] and assess the requirement [1:09:29] for at least 200 B-21s [1:09:31] to match the global threat, [1:09:33] would you speak just [1:09:34] to exactly what that would mean [1:09:36] and what the probability [1:09:36] of that is? [1:09:39] Thank you for the question, [1:09:40] and I appreciate the fact [1:09:41] that you're listening to [1:09:43] and hearing from [1:09:43] combatant commanders, [1:09:44] because that's who [1:09:45] we listen to as well, [1:09:46] who are looking [1:09:46] at the operational plans [1:09:47] and what would be required [1:09:49] to ensure we deter [1:09:50] and, if necessary, defeat. [1:09:51] Assets like the B-21 [1:09:52] or the F-47 [1:09:53] are critical to that. [1:09:55] That's why we're funding them [1:09:56] and increasing the funding, [1:09:58] and where necessary, [1:09:59] would increase the allocation. [1:10:00] And I think you see [1:10:02] a budget that reflects [1:10:03] the reality [1:10:05] that we have to invest [1:10:06] in more capabilities [1:10:07] to include the B-21, [1:10:10] which is ahead of schedule, [1:10:12] and we will be funding [1:10:13] to the tune of $6 billion, [1:10:14] and we believe [1:10:15] will require a lot more [1:10:17] over $100 in the future, [1:10:18] but I'll defer to the chairman. [1:10:20] Thank you for the question. [1:10:21] Working through the JROC [1:10:24] and the vice chiefs, [1:10:26] I'll absolutely stack hands [1:10:27] around assessing the requirement, [1:10:29] and we're glad to see B-21 [1:10:32] on the flight path, [1:10:33] nobody intended, [1:10:35] that it's on [1:10:36] through operational testing. [1:10:38] On the specific numbers, [1:10:41] the one sort of big picture [1:10:43] strategic thing I want to say [1:10:44] is we want to make sure [1:10:46] as we think through [1:10:47] what does air power [1:10:48] of the future look like [1:10:49] based on the evolving threat [1:10:51] that we're staying well [1:10:52] in front of it, [1:10:53] and so that's the only thing [1:10:54] we'll look at in the assessment, [1:10:56] but I'm on board [1:10:57] with assessing the numbers. [1:10:58] I want to make sure [1:11:00] we're buying ahead [1:11:01] of the technology development curve [1:11:03] so that we give [1:11:04] all those young warfighters [1:11:05] out there [1:11:06] the capabilities [1:11:07] that we need [1:11:07] well into the future. [1:11:09] Is there any question [1:11:10] at all that we're going [1:11:10] to need more than [1:11:11] 100 B-21s? [1:11:14] I want to go back. [1:11:16] Here's how I'll look at it, [1:11:17] Senator. [1:11:17] I want to go back [1:11:18] and look at the O plans [1:11:19] right now that we have [1:11:20] to make sure [1:11:21] that we allocate those numbers, [1:11:23] so I don't believe so, [1:11:25] but I do want to take [1:11:26] the due diligence time [1:11:28] if you'll allow me [1:11:29] to look at that, Senator. [1:11:30] I appreciate the opportunity [1:11:31] to visit with you [1:11:32] and to clarify [1:11:34] what that number [1:11:35] should look like [1:11:36] in the near future. [1:11:36] Yes, sir. [1:11:37] Thank you. [1:11:37] Thank you very much, [1:11:38] Senator Brown. [1:11:38] Senator Blumenthal. [1:11:40] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:11:41] Thank you for being here today. [1:11:45] I want to talk [1:11:45] about the cost of war. [1:11:49] The cost of war [1:11:49] include caring [1:11:51] for our veterans. [1:11:52] We've had an estimate [1:11:55] from Mr. Hurst yesterday [1:11:56] that the cost to date [1:11:59] in dollars [1:12:00] for this war [1:12:01] has been $25 billion, [1:12:03] which I believe [1:12:05] is well below [1:12:06] the actual cost [1:12:07] based on everything [1:12:08] that I've heard, [1:12:10] everything available to us [1:12:12] in various kinds [1:12:13] of settings, [1:12:14] and I'm going to ask [1:12:16] for a more accurate assessment. [1:12:18] But we also know [1:12:20] that about 400 service members [1:12:21] have been wounded [1:12:22] as a result of this war. [1:12:25] When they retire, [1:12:29] when they come home, [1:12:31] their retirement pay [1:12:32] will be docked [1:12:33] dollar for dollar [1:12:34] for every disability benefit [1:12:40] dollar they receive. [1:12:41] Secretary Hegseth, [1:12:42] I'd like your commitment [1:12:45] that you will support [1:12:46] the Major Richard Starr Act [1:12:49] that will eliminate [1:12:50] this wounded warrior tax. [1:12:53] I'm sure you're familiar with it. [1:12:55] Tens of thousands [1:12:56] of servicemen and women [1:12:57] now are reduced [1:13:00] in their retirement pay [1:13:02] literally for every dollar [1:13:04] of disability benefits [1:13:06] they receive. [1:13:08] Well, I appreciate [1:13:09] your focus on this issue, [1:13:10] and I will tell you [1:13:11] of the, you mentioned [1:13:12] roughly 400 [1:13:13] that have been injured, [1:13:14] thankfully over 90% [1:13:15] are returned to duty, [1:13:16] but that doesn't mean [1:13:17] they wouldn't have [1:13:18] a residual challenge, [1:13:19] and we're tracking [1:13:21] that at point of injury [1:13:22] to ensure that [1:13:23] that is noted [1:13:24] even though they're [1:13:24] returned to duty. [1:13:25] But what I like [1:13:26] is your commitment [1:13:27] that you will support [1:13:28] the Major Richard Starr. [1:13:29] As I have said [1:13:30] in the past [1:13:31] to other organizations, [1:13:32] we support the Richard Starr Act. [1:13:34] Thank you. [1:13:35] On the issue of cost, [1:13:39] Mr. Hurst, [1:13:41] does that $25 billion estimate [1:13:44] include all of the costs [1:13:46] in terms of damage [1:13:48] to our bases, [1:13:51] the need to replace planes [1:13:55] and munitions [1:13:56] and the costs [1:14:00] of injuries [1:14:01] to our servicemen [1:14:02] and women? [1:14:04] Senator, [1:14:05] so for the Milcon [1:14:07] facilities replacement cost, [1:14:08] that's probably [1:14:09] the hardest thing [1:14:09] to estimate right now [1:14:10] because we don't know [1:14:11] what our future posture [1:14:12] is going to be [1:14:12] or the future construction [1:14:13] of those bases. [1:14:14] Well, you owe it to us. [1:14:15] You're here to ask [1:14:17] for appropriations. [1:14:20] Of course. [1:14:20] And I would like [1:14:22] a more accurate estimate [1:14:24] of what has been done [1:14:27] that will require replacement, [1:14:29] and renovation [1:14:30] as well as the other costs. [1:14:33] And I think $25 billion [1:14:35] is probably less than half, [1:14:39] maybe less than a quarter [1:14:40] of the total cost of war, [1:14:41] which is the reason [1:14:41] why the supplemental request [1:14:44] is much higher. [1:14:46] So I think you owe it [1:14:47] to the American people [1:14:48] to give us the straight talk [1:14:51] about what the costs have been. [1:14:53] Mr. Secretary, [1:14:55] I know you have characterized [1:14:57] this war [1:14:58] as an astonishing military [1:15:03] success, to use your words, [1:15:05] yesterday. [1:15:06] But the American people [1:15:08] aren't buying it. [1:15:11] And I know you feel [1:15:14] the American people [1:15:14] are seeing through [1:15:15] the abstruse stuff [1:15:19] that is thrown at them. [1:15:20] But one point is irrefutable, [1:15:24] which is America never succeeds [1:15:26] in war unless the American people [1:15:28] are behind it. [1:15:29] And if what you're seeing [1:15:33] as success now is winning, [1:15:37] I would hate to see [1:15:38] what losing looks like, [1:15:39] because none of the shifting [1:15:41] and contradictory objectives [1:15:43] of the war so far [1:15:44] have been achieved. [1:15:46] Likewise, let me ask you, [1:15:47] yesterday, [1:15:48] the president said [1:15:49] that Ukraine has been, quote, [1:15:52] militarily defeated. [1:15:54] I assume you don't agree [1:15:56] with that assessment. [1:15:57] The negative nature [1:16:02] in which you characterize [1:16:03] the incredible [1:16:04] and historic effort [1:16:05] in Iran [1:16:06] is part of the reason, [1:16:07] Senator, [1:16:08] why the American people [1:16:09] view it the way they do. [1:16:10] It's why I looked out [1:16:10] at our press corps [1:16:11] at the Pentagon [1:16:12] and called them [1:16:12] the Pharisees in the press. [1:16:14] It's because they look [1:16:15] for every problem. [1:16:15] Well, I'm asking you about Ukraine. [1:16:16] You look for every problem [1:16:17] that exists. [1:16:18] And you miss... [1:16:19] Ukraine has been militarily defeated. [1:16:21] You missed the plank. [1:16:22] I would submit, [1:16:22] based on my nine trips [1:16:24] to Ukraine, [1:16:27] that is a false narrative [1:16:29] that the president's buying [1:16:30] from Vladimir Putin. [1:16:31] We are two months into a historic [1:16:31] military success in Iran, [1:16:33] and you want to call it a defeat. [1:16:35] And it's defeatist Democrats [1:16:36] like you [1:16:36] that cloud the mind [1:16:37] of the American people [1:16:38] and would otherwise fully support [1:16:40] preventing Iran [1:16:42] from having a nuclear weapon. [1:16:43] ...administration, [1:16:44] and they are bravely [1:16:46] fighting our fight. [1:16:48] And that is the reason [1:16:49] that I'm pursuing [1:16:50] the Russian sanctions bill, [1:16:51] which is bipartisan, [1:16:52] along with Senator Graham, [1:16:54] and why I hope [1:16:54] we will recognize [1:16:56] our obligation [1:16:57] to release that $400 million. [1:16:59] Thank you. [1:16:59] we've appropriated. [1:17:00] Thank you, Senator Blumenthal. [1:17:01] Senator Ernst. [1:17:03] Thank you, Mr. Chair, [1:17:04] and thank you, gentlemen, [1:17:05] for being here today. [1:17:07] I really do appreciate [1:17:08] your time to be with us. [1:17:11] Before I begin, [1:17:13] some of my questions, [1:17:14] I do want to start [1:17:15] with something personal, [1:17:16] and both to you, [1:17:17] Secretary Hegseth, [1:17:18] and to the chairman, [1:17:20] I want to thank you both [1:17:21] for the time that you take [1:17:24] to recognize our fallen [1:17:25] and those that have given, [1:17:28] of course, [1:17:29] during this administration, [1:17:31] given their all. [1:17:32] You have traveled to Dover [1:17:34] and have been there [1:17:35] to greet those families [1:17:36] and to welcome home [1:17:37] the fallen. [1:17:38] I've been there with you, [1:17:40] and Iowa has been hit, [1:17:42] in particular, very hard. [1:17:44] We lost two of our [1:17:45] Iowa National Guardsmen [1:17:46] from the 2nd Brigade Combat Team, [1:17:48] 34th Infantry Division, [1:17:50] Secretary Hegseth, [1:17:51] you know full well, [1:17:52] the 34th. [1:17:53] But we also lost six members [1:17:56] from the 103rd Sustainment Command [1:17:59] Expeditionary based out [1:18:01] of Des Moines, Iowa [1:18:03] during this current conflict. [1:18:05] And again, [1:18:06] your presence there [1:18:07] meant a lot to the families. [1:18:09] It also meant a lot to me. [1:18:11] So thank you very much [1:18:12] for taking the time [1:18:13] to do that. [1:18:15] Secretary Hegseth, [1:18:16] you and I have had [1:18:17] many discussions [1:18:18] over the course [1:18:20] of many months now [1:18:22] regarding general officer positions. [1:18:24] And, you know, [1:18:26] I believe that we were [1:18:27] operating in good faith [1:18:29] as we talked through [1:18:30] a couple of those [1:18:30] in particular, [1:18:31] two Iowans, [1:18:33] General Mingus [1:18:33] and General Randy George. [1:18:36] I was disappointed [1:18:38] to see that their retirements [1:18:40] were hastened [1:18:41] over what I believed [1:18:44] had been set out [1:18:46] by you [1:18:46] and the administration. [1:18:48] So I just want [1:18:48] to take the time [1:18:49] to list out [1:18:51] some of General Randy George's [1:18:53] accomplishments [1:18:54] as Army Chief of Staff. [1:18:56] He pulled the Army [1:18:57] out of its worst [1:18:58] recruiting crisis [1:18:59] since the Vietnam era, [1:19:01] exceeding fiscal year [1:19:02] 2024 recruiting goals [1:19:04] and welcoming [1:19:05] more than 61,000 [1:19:07] new soldiers. [1:19:09] Recruitment numbers [1:19:10] that both you [1:19:10] and the president [1:19:11] talk a lot about [1:19:12] and rightfully so. [1:19:14] He cut 5% [1:19:15] of general officer positions, [1:19:17] 12 positions [1:19:18] that were deemed [1:19:19] as nonessential [1:19:20] in the Army. [1:19:22] And he reduced [1:19:22] the Army headquarters [1:19:23] by 1,000 personnel. [1:19:26] He co-authored [1:19:27] the Army Transformation Initiative, [1:19:29] which is a comprehensive [1:19:30] response aligned [1:19:32] with your directives. [1:19:34] And he testified [1:19:35] here in front of Congress [1:19:36] and took a lot of heat [1:19:37] defending that Army [1:19:39] transformation. [1:19:41] He was suddenly let go [1:19:43] at the beginning [1:19:44] of April, 2026. [1:19:47] General George's merits, [1:19:49] which I firmly believe in, [1:19:50] he enlisted [1:19:51] at the age of 17. [1:19:53] He is a West Point graduate. [1:19:55] He had four combat deployments. [1:19:58] He served in Desert Storm, [1:20:00] Iraq, and Afghanistan. [1:20:02] He had 38 years [1:20:03] of honorable service. [1:20:05] He achieved [1:20:05] the greatest Army recruitment [1:20:07] and modernization effort [1:20:09] in a generation. [1:20:11] So I want to thank him [1:20:13] for his service. [1:20:15] And I would like to enter [1:20:16] into the record, [1:20:17] Mr. Chair, [1:20:19] the speeches that I did [1:20:21] honoring General Randy A. George [1:20:24] on his retirement [1:20:25] and General James J. Mingus [1:20:28] on his retirement as well. [1:20:30] Without objection, [1:20:30] they'll be admitted. [1:20:31] Thank you very much. [1:20:33] I'd like to talk a little bit [1:20:35] about the audit, [1:20:36] Mr. Secretary. [1:20:38] I saw the video [1:20:40] that you posted this week [1:20:41] calling on the department [1:20:42] to pass a clean audit. [1:20:44] And thank you for doing that. [1:20:46] It's something that we talked [1:20:47] about during your confirmation hearing. [1:20:50] Fiscal responsibility [1:20:51] at the department [1:20:52] has been a priority of mine [1:20:54] for a very long time. [1:20:55] And I think it's time [1:20:57] that we build on that momentum. [1:20:59] It's extremely important. [1:21:01] And that's why I'm pushing [1:21:02] for my Receipts Act [1:21:04] in this year's NDAA. [1:21:06] It's focused on improving [1:21:07] financial traceability [1:21:09] and accountability [1:21:10] across the department. [1:21:12] And if you could talk [1:21:13] a little bit more [1:21:14] about the efforts [1:21:15] in making sure [1:21:16] that we are being [1:21:17] much more accountable [1:21:18] to our taxpayers, [1:21:20] what is that effort [1:21:21] going to entail? [1:21:22] When will we see [1:21:23] a clean audit? [1:21:25] As I said, [1:21:26] Senator, [1:21:26] thank you for your work [1:21:27] on the audit. [1:21:28] That has been a priority [1:21:29] of our department [1:21:30] from day one. [1:21:31] And we put in place [1:21:32] goals and benchmarks [1:21:34] to get to FY28, [1:21:35] get to 28 for a clean audit. [1:21:37] The Joint Task Force audit, [1:21:39] which we announced, [1:21:39] was a reflection [1:21:40] of even more capabilities [1:21:42] we want to push forward [1:21:43] and centralize authority [1:21:44] to make sure it happens. [1:21:46] Jay's been involved [1:21:46] from the beginning. [1:21:47] We also have a new IG [1:21:48] who the new IG's focus, [1:21:51] one of his focus points [1:21:52] is precisely this. [1:21:53] And he's prepared [1:21:54] to work with us [1:21:56] to ensure we reach it. [1:21:57] So I think at every level [1:21:58] and through this budget, [1:21:59] it's a focus. [1:22:00] Okay. [1:22:00] Thank you. [1:22:01] We look forward [1:22:01] to seeing a clean audit. [1:22:03] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:22:03] Thank you, Senator Ernst. [1:22:04] Senator Hirono. [1:22:05] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:22:07] Before I begin my questions, [1:22:10] I'd like to take a moment [1:22:11] to highlight [1:22:11] the true costs [1:22:13] of this war, [1:22:14] both for the military [1:22:16] and everyday Americans [1:22:18] and the true costs [1:22:20] of the president's illegal war [1:22:21] with Iran. [1:22:22] And since the start [1:22:23] of the war, [1:22:25] 13, 14 brave U.S. service members [1:22:27] have been killed [1:22:28] and more than 400 [1:22:29] have been wounded. [1:22:30] We've burned through [1:22:31] over $25 billion [1:22:33] in taxpayer money [1:22:34] with no end in sight. [1:22:36] And the fiscal year 27 budget request [1:22:38] is a massive 42% increase [1:22:41] from last year. [1:22:43] Hundreds of critical munitions [1:22:45] have been expended [1:22:47] and deployments [1:22:48] have been extended [1:22:49] directly impacting [1:22:51] service members' quality of life, [1:22:53] military readiness, [1:22:55] and our ability [1:22:55] to deter our adversaries. [1:23:00] The relationships [1:23:01] with our allies, [1:23:04] some of our closest allies [1:23:05] and partners, [1:23:06] have been fractured. [1:23:07] And the closure [1:23:08] of the Strait of Hormuz, [1:23:10] which somehow caught [1:23:12] the president by surprise, [1:23:13] even though he had [1:23:15] to have been warned, [1:23:16] is directly contributing [1:23:18] to the affordable crisis [1:23:19] that Americans are facing. [1:23:21] Energy costs are skyrocketing [1:23:23] with the price of gas [1:23:25] now at its highest level [1:23:27] in almost four years. [1:23:30] Instability has driven [1:23:31] interest rates [1:23:32] to its highest level [1:23:33] since September of last year. [1:23:35] The cost of fertilizer [1:23:37] is spiking, [1:23:38] which will have a direct impact [1:23:40] on the cost of food. [1:23:41] This illegal war [1:23:43] is driving up costs, [1:23:44] undermining readiness, [1:23:46] and alienating our allies [1:23:48] with neither a clear rationale [1:23:50] for starting this war [1:23:53] nor an exit strategy. [1:23:55] And when the president [1:23:56] was asked how long [1:23:58] he'll let this war continue, [1:24:01] he said, [1:24:02] do not rush me. [1:24:05] I have a question [1:24:06] for General Kane [1:24:07] relating to women [1:24:09] serving in combat. [1:24:10] And I'd like to hear [1:24:12] your best military advice. [1:24:15] Does the mere fact [1:24:16] of women being in combat [1:24:18] armed units lower standards [1:24:21] or readiness [1:24:21] if they meet [1:24:23] the physical standards? [1:24:25] Well, ma'am, [1:24:26] the standards are set [1:24:29] by the civilians. [1:24:30] We have examples [1:24:31] of women leading well [1:24:33] across the joint force. [1:24:36] I'll highlight [1:24:37] some of our current commanders [1:24:38] engaged in the fight [1:24:40] in Epic Fury, [1:24:41] specifically one [1:24:42] of our bomb squadrons [1:24:44] are led by [1:24:44] an extraordinary female leader [1:24:46] who's doing great work. [1:24:48] But those standards [1:24:49] are set by... [1:24:50] I'm sorry. [1:24:51] I didn't mean to step on you. [1:24:51] I think your answer [1:24:53] is that, in fact, [1:24:53] it does not lower [1:24:54] standards of readiness. [1:24:57] Second question, [1:24:57] should every service member, [1:24:59] regardless of gender, [1:25:00] be permitted [1:25:01] to serve in any role, [1:25:02] including the combat arms, [1:25:04] if they meet [1:25:05] the standards established? [1:25:08] Yes or no? [1:25:09] Is that to me, ma'am? [1:25:11] Over the last decade [1:25:12] since combat arms [1:25:13] have been open to women, [1:25:15] have you personally [1:25:16] seen any instance [1:25:19] where the standard [1:25:20] resulted in a degradation [1:25:22] in combat effectiveness? [1:25:24] Apologies. [1:25:25] I didn't hear [1:25:26] your first question. [1:25:27] The, you know, [1:25:28] people policies [1:25:29] are all set [1:25:30] by the civilian leaders [1:25:32] in the government. [1:25:32] No, I'm asking you personally [1:25:33] in this question. [1:25:33] Could you repeat [1:25:33] the question again? [1:25:34] I'm sorry, ma'am. [1:25:35] Over the last decade [1:25:36] since combat arms [1:25:37] have been open to women, [1:25:39] have you personally [1:25:40] seen any instance [1:25:41] where the standard [1:25:42] resulted in a degradation [1:25:44] and combat effectiveness? [1:25:47] Again, I'll highlight [1:25:48] that the standards [1:25:49] are set by our civilian leaders. [1:25:51] Women continue [1:25:51] to perform [1:25:53] well across a range [1:25:56] of MOSs [1:25:57] and jobs [1:25:58] and AFSCs [1:25:59] that are out there. [1:25:59] No. [1:26:00] I do need to get to a question [1:26:01] for Secretary Hickson. [1:26:02] Prior to your nomination hearing, [1:26:05] you said women shouldn't serve [1:26:07] in combat armed units. [1:26:09] At your confirmation hearing, [1:26:11] you reversed course [1:26:12] and, excuse me, [1:26:15] and you basically said [1:26:16] as long as the women [1:26:17] meet the standards, [1:26:19] they should be able to serve. [1:26:21] But recently, [1:26:22] you ordered a review [1:26:23] of the effectiveness [1:26:24] of women in combat roles. [1:26:25] And I am concerned [1:26:27] you are laying the groundwork [1:26:29] to reverse the policy [1:26:31] allowing women to serve [1:26:32] in these units [1:26:33] because right now, [1:26:34] current law, [1:26:35] if you want to change [1:26:36] this policy, [1:26:37] current law requires you [1:26:39] to submit a report [1:26:39] to Congress [1:26:40] justifying such a change. [1:26:43] So did you order the review [1:26:45] to support a potential decision [1:26:47] to overturn the policy [1:26:49] of having women [1:26:50] in combat roles? [1:26:51] We are laser-focused [1:26:54] on standards. [1:26:54] The highest male standard [1:26:55] for every combat arms position [1:26:57] should be the standard. [1:26:58] And 10 years into this, [1:27:00] we are reviewing it, [1:27:01] which is what the American people [1:27:02] would expect. [1:27:03] Also, there's nothing illegal [1:27:04] about a war [1:27:05] that defends the American people [1:27:06] and prevents Iran [1:27:07] from having a nuclear bomb. [1:27:08] You know, [1:27:09] you didn't answer the question [1:27:10] because the reason [1:27:12] that you're asking [1:27:13] for this review, [1:27:14] I think has to do [1:27:15] with your earlier position [1:27:16] that you don't think [1:27:17] women should serve [1:27:18] in combat roles. [1:27:19] So now we have this study [1:27:21] and I'd like to ask you, [1:27:22] will you reveal the study [1:27:25] to the public, [1:27:26] to the American people? [1:27:27] Will you make the study public? [1:27:31] Will you make that study? [1:27:33] Yes or no? [1:27:33] We're doing the study [1:27:34] for that very reason, [1:27:35] to ensure that real science [1:27:37] is applied to this question [1:27:39] and not social engineering [1:27:40] like the previous administration. [1:27:41] We appreciate your assurance [1:27:43] that that will be made public. [1:27:45] Yeah, I think it's really critical [1:27:47] that the study be made. [1:27:49] Thank you, ma'am. [1:27:50] Senator Scott. [1:27:51] Thank you. [1:27:52] Well, first, [1:27:53] I thank each of you [1:27:54] for being here. [1:27:54] Secretary Hitchfuck, [1:27:55] can you talk about [1:27:56] you've had the job [1:27:57] for a little bit. [1:27:58] What are you most proud of [1:27:59] and what are your biggest challenges? [1:28:02] Well, I appreciate the question [1:28:03] and what I'm most proud of [1:28:07] is the incredible men and women [1:28:09] who serve in our nations [1:28:11] in uniform [1:28:12] and what they are capable of [1:28:13] when they're given [1:28:14] a clear mission [1:28:15] and unleashed to do it. [1:28:17] And I think the best reflection [1:28:19] of the success [1:28:20] of President Trump [1:28:21] and this War Department [1:28:22] is the historic recruiting success [1:28:25] and the historic morale [1:28:27] amongst our ranks. [1:28:28] I would encourage every member [1:28:29] of this committee, [1:28:31] Democrat or Republican, [1:28:32] go into the formations, [1:28:35] go into the Air Force formations, [1:28:36] the Army formations, [1:28:37] the Marine Corps formations [1:28:37] and talk to corporals, [1:28:39] talk to sergeants, [1:28:40] talk to lieutenants, [1:28:41] talk to captains, [1:28:42] talk to colonels. [1:28:43] And what you will find [1:28:45] are men and women [1:28:46] more inspired to serve [1:28:47] in the military [1:28:48] than they have been [1:28:49] in a generation. [1:28:50] And you see that [1:28:51] in the young Americans [1:28:52] who are rushing [1:28:52] to recruiting stations [1:28:54] at historic numbers, [1:28:56] 30-year highs [1:28:57] across the force. [1:28:58] We're hitting our recruiting numbers [1:28:59] halfway through the year. [1:29:02] Why is that? [1:29:03] Because the American people [1:29:04] look at what we're doing [1:29:05] at the War Department [1:29:06] by getting back to basics [1:29:08] and they're attracted to that. [1:29:10] Same with our retention rates, [1:29:11] which are now merit-based. [1:29:13] Our best sergeants, [1:29:14] our best leaders are staying. [1:29:16] That's exactly what we want. [1:29:18] So we've made changes [1:29:19] to change the environment. [1:29:21] The renaming of the department [1:29:23] to the War Department [1:29:24] is not just a name. [1:29:25] In fact, it's restoring it [1:29:26] to the original name [1:29:27] of the department [1:29:28] set by George Washington. [1:29:30] But it's an ethos as well. [1:29:32] That warrior ethos [1:29:33] lives inside the heart [1:29:34] of each one of these men and women [1:29:35] and we're unleashing it. [1:29:36] I'm proud of the... [1:29:38] I mean, you name it, [1:29:38] the border, the missions, [1:29:39] yes, those are all [1:29:40] incredible demonstrations of that, [1:29:42] but it's the people [1:29:42] and the urgency of Americans [1:29:44] to want to be a part of it [1:29:45] that is the best affirmation, [1:29:46] Senator. [1:29:48] Thank you. [1:29:48] So we've talked about [1:29:49] the importance of not [1:29:50] relying on Chinese drugs [1:29:52] for our military. [1:29:54] Can you just talk about [1:29:54] what the... [1:29:57] what you're doing [1:29:57] to make sure [1:29:58] that we don't continue [1:29:58] to rely on China [1:29:59] for anything, [1:30:00] including our drugs? [1:30:03] Oh, drugs. [1:30:04] Yeah. [1:30:04] Absolutely. [1:30:06] We can't be dependent on China [1:30:07] on anything that's critical [1:30:08] to our supply chain, [1:30:09] even if it's the national industrial base [1:30:12] and not just [1:30:12] the defense industrial base. [1:30:14] And you've been a leader on that. [1:30:16] This committee's been a leader on that. [1:30:17] Onshoring, [1:30:18] bringing manufacturing here, [1:30:20] bringing critical capabilities here, [1:30:23] is central to the interagency [1:30:25] and the NSC, [1:30:26] but also our department. [1:30:28] If any critical weapon system [1:30:30] is reliant upon something [1:30:31] China could change [1:30:32] at a moment's notice, [1:30:33] then we have a true challenge [1:30:37] to our ability to produce [1:30:38] for the American people. [1:30:39] And so we're finding all of those, [1:30:40] changing them, [1:30:41] on-shoring it. [1:30:42] Reviving the defense industrial base [1:30:45] allows us to ensure [1:30:46] we're separated from China [1:30:48] on anything that's critical. [1:30:50] Thank you. [1:30:50] Can you talk about [1:30:51] the importance [1:30:51] of foreign military sales [1:30:52] to our allies [1:30:53] and our partners [1:30:54] and what you're doing [1:30:55] to make sure that... [1:30:56] that... [1:30:57] that... [1:30:58] whether it's what you're doing [1:30:59] right now in Iran [1:31:00] or any potential conflict [1:31:01] in... in Asia, [1:31:02] you... [1:31:03] our partners have the best... [1:31:04] assets to be. [1:31:06] It will be a great partner. [1:31:09] Absolutely. [1:31:09] Foreign military sales [1:31:11] has been a huge problem [1:31:12] for a long time [1:31:13] because the department [1:31:14] didn't prioritize it [1:31:15] and organize to deliver [1:31:16] efficiently on it. [1:31:17] So we're working [1:31:18] with the State Department. [1:31:19] We've changed the way [1:31:19] we do business internally. [1:31:21] The executive order, [1:31:22] the America First [1:31:23] arms strategy [1:31:23] prioritizes [1:31:25] what we sell [1:31:26] and to whom, [1:31:26] a catalog approach. [1:31:28] But it took us... [1:31:29] This committee would be [1:31:30] astonished to... [1:31:31] to know how long [1:31:33] it took us [1:31:33] just to get our arms [1:31:34] around who we're selling [1:31:35] to what [1:31:35] and by what processes, [1:31:37] which means there was [1:31:37] no strategy behind [1:31:38] ensuring we're sending [1:31:40] the proper demand signal [1:31:41] to industry [1:31:41] and delivering those systems [1:31:43] on time [1:31:44] and under budget [1:31:45] to those countries, [1:31:46] which you can imagine [1:31:47] is frustrating to partners [1:31:48] who are relying on those [1:31:49] to be able to step up [1:31:50] and burden share. [1:31:51] So foreign military sales [1:31:52] is critical [1:31:53] to our own [1:31:54] defense industrial base. [1:31:55] More customers. [1:31:56] More customers [1:31:56] for our companies [1:31:57] that employ [1:31:58] more American workers [1:31:59] to ensure our allies [1:32:00] are properly armed [1:32:01] for the fights [1:32:02] and they can stand [1:32:02] alongside us. [1:32:03] So FMS is a big one [1:32:05] for us, Senator. [1:32:06] General Cain, [1:32:06] I just want to commend you [1:32:08] and everybody in the military [1:32:09] for what you did in Venezuela [1:32:13] and then what you've done in Iran. [1:32:16] Can you... [1:32:17] The willingness [1:32:18] of the American military [1:32:18] to fight and win, [1:32:20] do you think it's changing [1:32:21] the calculus for Beijing [1:32:23] and Moscow? [1:32:26] Well, Senator, [1:32:27] I know they're watching [1:32:28] and I'm incredibly proud [1:32:30] of the joint force [1:32:32] and their ability [1:32:34] to integrate [1:32:34] and synchronize [1:32:36] a range of activities [1:32:37] and I suspect [1:32:38] that my counterpart [1:32:40] in China [1:32:41] is watching very closely [1:32:43] and envious of [1:32:44] what our joint force [1:32:46] is capable of doing [1:32:47] if ordered to do so. [1:32:50] Well, thank each of you [1:32:50] and thank everybody [1:32:51] that serves under you. [1:32:52] Thank you, Senator Scott. [1:32:54] Senator Cain. [1:32:55] Thank you, Mr. Chair. [1:32:56] Mr. Hurst, [1:32:57] I want you to just confirm [1:32:58] something for me [1:32:59] about the president's [1:33:00] submitted budget. [1:33:02] $1.5 trillion [1:33:03] is about a 40-plus percent [1:33:05] increase from FY26. [1:33:08] Am I right [1:33:09] that not a penny [1:33:10] of that [1:33:11] is to go to [1:33:12] a pay raise [1:33:13] for the 800,000 civilians [1:33:16] who work [1:33:16] for the Department of Defense? [1:33:19] We have 4.2% [1:33:20] of a civilian salary [1:33:22] set aside for bonuses [1:33:23] to make sure [1:33:25] we can recognize [1:33:25] high performers [1:33:26] in the civilian workforce. [1:33:27] But you have guaranteed [1:33:28] pay raises [1:33:29] for the active duty [1:33:30] in the Guard [1:33:30] and Reserve component [1:33:31] but no guaranteed [1:33:32] raises for civilians. [1:33:33] There are guaranteed [1:33:34] raises for the military [1:33:35] but in the last year [1:33:36] this department [1:33:37] has given out [1:33:37] more civilian bonuses. [1:33:38] Well, if we're going [1:33:40] to increase the defense [1:33:41] budget by that much [1:33:42] I would hope the committee [1:33:43] would take a look at this. [1:33:44] Chairman Cain, [1:33:47] and I like the sound [1:33:47] of that, Chairman Cain. [1:33:50] General Cain, [1:33:51] I want to ask you [1:33:52] a question about [1:33:52] Southern Spear. [1:33:53] It's an operational question. [1:33:54] I know from your background [1:33:56] that you carefully [1:33:57] act to keep military actions [1:34:00] within the rules of war. [1:34:02] What legal justification [1:34:04] could there possibly be [1:34:06] that would allow [1:34:08] the U.S. military [1:34:09] to strike boats [1:34:11] in international waters [1:34:12] and kill the occupants [1:34:13] of those boats [1:34:14] without a showing of evidence [1:34:16] that there's narcotics [1:34:18] on those boats? [1:34:20] Well, sir, [1:34:20] as you know, [1:34:21] our job is to show [1:34:23] the range of options, [1:34:25] the associated risks, [1:34:26] and then take [1:34:28] those execution orders, [1:34:30] transmit them down [1:34:31] to the COCOMs [1:34:32] on legally appropriate [1:34:34] and legally backstopped actions. [1:34:37] Could you give me [1:34:38] a legal justification [1:34:40] that would authorize [1:34:41] striking boats [1:34:43] that do not have evidence [1:34:44] that they're carrying narcotics? [1:34:47] I don't have, [1:34:47] I apologize, [1:34:48] I didn't mean to interrupt you. [1:34:49] I don't have a copy [1:34:50] of the order issued [1:34:52] to Southcom with me today. [1:34:54] It's classified [1:34:54] in its own right, [1:34:55] which clearly articulates [1:34:57] based on a variety [1:34:59] of criteria [1:35:00] what constitutes [1:35:01] a valid military [1:35:03] and legally valid target [1:35:04] in that theater. [1:35:06] And I know, [1:35:07] I just want to say, [1:35:08] I know and trust [1:35:09] that our commanders [1:35:11] at Echelon [1:35:11] are rigorously following [1:35:13] that legal opinion [1:35:15] and those legal boundaries [1:35:17] upon which we've been [1:35:18] issued those orders. [1:35:20] And General Cain, [1:35:21] I would encourage, [1:35:22] again, my colleagues, [1:35:23] I am at a disadvantage. [1:35:25] I've seen the legal opinion, [1:35:26] but I can't talk about it [1:35:27] because it's classified. [1:35:28] I've seen the targeting criteria, [1:35:31] but I can't talk about them [1:35:32] because they're classified. [1:35:33] I've seen the secret list [1:35:35] of DTOs against whom [1:35:37] we have declared war [1:35:38] that even they haven't [1:35:39] been informed of, [1:35:40] but I can't talk about it [1:35:42] because it's classified. [1:35:43] But I would urge [1:35:44] all of my colleagues [1:35:45] to go to the SCIF [1:35:47] and read the targeting criteria [1:35:49] and get briefed about it. [1:35:50] And then also look at [1:35:52] all of the files [1:35:52] of all the strikes [1:35:53] that have taken place. [1:35:54] I've done that [1:35:55] with the first 46 strikes or so. [1:35:58] And I think there's [1:36:00] a profound mismatch [1:36:01] between what is occurring [1:36:03] and the underlying assumptions [1:36:05] in the legal opinion. [1:36:07] And I would just encourage [1:36:07] my colleagues to dig into this. [1:36:09] To Secretary Hegseth [1:36:10] and General Cain, [1:36:11] the War Powers Resolution [1:36:13] specifies that a war initiated [1:36:14] by a president [1:36:15] without congressional approval [1:36:17] must be concluded [1:36:18] within 60 days. [1:36:20] It can be extended [1:36:21] by an additional 30 days [1:36:23] if, quote, [1:36:24] the president determines [1:36:25] and certifies to Congress [1:36:27] in writing [1:36:27] that unavoidable military necessity [1:36:30] respecting the safety [1:36:31] of the U.S. armed forces [1:36:33] requires the continued use [1:36:35] of such armed forces [1:36:36] in the course of bringing about [1:36:38] a prompt removal [1:36:39] of such forces. [1:36:40] We're right at the 60-day deadline. [1:36:43] Is the president intending [1:36:44] to either seek congressional [1:36:46] authorization for the war in Iran [1:36:49] or send us the legally required [1:36:51] certification that he needs [1:36:53] an additional 30 days [1:36:55] to remove U.S. forces [1:36:56] from the war? [1:36:59] Just briefly on the previous question, [1:37:01] we do know that these are [1:37:02] designated terrorist organizations, [1:37:04] so we treat them like the Al-Qaeda [1:37:05] of our hemisphere, [1:37:06] just as a note. [1:37:07] But that was not the question I asked. [1:37:09] I know there's more to that question. [1:37:10] I just think it's important [1:37:11] for the public to understand that. [1:37:13] There's no willy-nilly targeting [1:37:14] of drug boats. [1:37:15] We know exactly who these people [1:37:17] are affiliated with. [1:37:17] I was asking about [1:37:18] what's on the boats. [1:37:19] On Iran, ultimately, [1:37:22] I would defer to the White House [1:37:23] and White House counsel on that. [1:37:24] However, we are in a ceasefire [1:37:25] right now, [1:37:26] which our understanding means [1:37:27] the 60-day clock pauses [1:37:30] or stops in a ceasefire. [1:37:31] So you're not in. [1:37:33] It's our understanding, [1:37:34] just so you know. [1:37:34] Okay, well, I do not believe [1:37:36] the statute would support that. [1:37:37] I think the 60 days runs [1:37:39] maybe tomorrow, [1:37:40] and it's going to pose [1:37:41] a really important legal question [1:37:44] for the administration. [1:37:45] We have serious constitutional concerns, [1:37:48] and we don't want to layer those [1:37:49] with additional statutory concerns. [1:37:51] I yield back, Mr. Chair. [1:37:54] Thank you very much. [1:37:55] Senator Sullivan. [1:37:56] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:37:57] Thank you, gentlemen, [1:37:58] for your testimony. [1:38:00] Mr. Secretary, [1:38:01] I mentioned in the classified hearing today, [1:38:03] but I do think [1:38:03] the $1.5 trillion top line [1:38:05] is historic. [1:38:08] It meets the needs. [1:38:10] And the other thing, [1:38:10] as I mentioned in our earlier meeting, [1:38:13] you know, [1:38:13] the president's done a really good job [1:38:15] of getting other allies, [1:38:17] NATO and Asian allies, [1:38:18] to step up, [1:38:20] meet a 5% GDP of defense spending. [1:38:24] And in many ways, [1:38:26] that's what this is doing as well. [1:38:27] So isn't that important as well [1:38:29] in terms of our global leadership, [1:38:30] what you and the president [1:38:31] are providing? [1:38:32] Is that example as well? [1:38:34] I think the more we step up, [1:38:37] the more the world should look [1:38:39] at the American leadership [1:38:40] and example and step up as well. [1:38:41] And they're going to do that. [1:38:43] It helps. [1:38:44] It remains to be seen [1:38:45] whether some of our allies [1:38:46] actually step up [1:38:47] to their commitments, [1:38:48] but that is the hope. [1:38:50] Let me go to an element [1:38:51] of that budget [1:38:52] that I mentioned [1:38:53] in the classified hearing. [1:38:55] You know, [1:38:55] I always like to put this chart up [1:38:57] in different hearings. [1:38:58] We have the examples. [1:39:00] So a lot of our adversaries, [1:39:02] the Chinese, [1:39:03] the Russians, [1:39:04] in my AOR, [1:39:06] in the Arctic, [1:39:06] in the North Pacific, [1:39:07] these are the numbers. [1:39:08] Just recently, [1:39:09] eight is incursions, [1:39:10] easy incursions [1:39:11] by the Russians, [1:39:13] by the Chinese, [1:39:14] by the way, [1:39:15] the green ones [1:39:15] are joint Russian-Chinese [1:39:17] Strategic Bomber Task Forces, [1:39:20] joint Russian-Chinese [1:39:21] Naval Task Forces. [1:39:23] This is America, right? [1:39:25] This is a really important part [1:39:27] of our national defense. [1:39:30] So I was pleased to see [1:39:31] that one of the elements [1:39:33] in the budget [1:39:34] was what's referred to [1:39:36] by the Air Force's [1:39:37] the J-Bear [1:39:38] Fighter Town recapitalization, [1:39:41] given how strategically important [1:39:43] that Air Force base is. [1:39:45] General, can you talk a little bit [1:39:48] about that recapitalization? [1:39:51] It's for building out [1:39:55] what is a very strategic base, [1:39:57] but old. [1:39:59] A lot of these facilities [1:40:01] are from the 1950s. [1:40:03] The goal, [1:40:04] in the Air Force's language, [1:40:06] was to have a recapitalization [1:40:07] to provide a new, [1:40:08] state-of-the-art fighter facility [1:40:11] capable of supporting [1:40:12] multiple platforms now [1:40:14] and well into the future. [1:40:16] $6.9 billion total authorization, [1:40:18] $2.2 billion appropes [1:40:21] for this year. [1:40:22] Can you talk about the importance? [1:40:23] I was glad to host you [1:40:24] at J-Bear recently. [1:40:26] Can you talk about [1:40:27] the importance of this element [1:40:28] of the president's budget? [1:40:29] Yes, Senator. [1:40:30] Thank you for that. [1:40:32] Our investment up at J-Bear [1:40:34] is essential to modernizing [1:40:36] the nation's ability [1:40:38] to project power [1:40:39] and capabilities [1:40:40] and really bolsters [1:40:42] our effort [1:40:43] in not only the Indo-Pacific, [1:40:45] but also in the high north [1:40:46] and the Arctic, [1:40:47] which I know is something [1:40:48] that's passionate to you. [1:40:50] The Arctic is certainly [1:40:52] becoming more operationally [1:40:54] and strategically valuable, [1:40:56] and we need to be thinking [1:40:58] proactively around [1:40:59] how we're going to set [1:41:00] the conditions for us [1:41:01] to offer a range of options [1:41:03] to the secretary [1:41:04] and the president [1:41:05] about power projection [1:41:07] across a range of capabilities, [1:41:09] and fighters is certainly [1:41:10] one of them [1:41:11] in the recap effort that's there. [1:41:14] You know, it is, [1:41:15] it is our ability [1:41:16] to protect that flank [1:41:18] is a national imperative [1:41:19] and something [1:41:19] that we want to keep focused on, [1:41:22] and we appreciate the efforts [1:41:23] across this committee [1:41:25] and the rest of the Congress [1:41:27] to help us with that. [1:41:28] Thank you. [1:41:29] Mr. Secretary, [1:41:30] one of the things [1:41:30] that I've been talking about [1:41:31] and I think is really important now [1:41:33] is American energy [1:41:35] and us being energy dominant. [1:41:38] The president put [1:41:39] a recent executive order out [1:41:41] highlighting the need [1:41:43] to accelerate the ability [1:41:46] to produce LNG in America. [1:41:50] We have a huge LNG project [1:41:52] that we're getting close [1:41:54] to getting off the ground [1:41:55] in Alaska. [1:41:56] It would be huge [1:41:56] for our military [1:41:57] in terms of energy [1:41:59] for our military, [1:42:01] huge for our allies. [1:42:03] And can I get your commitment [1:42:04] to work with me [1:42:05] and this committee? [1:42:06] You mentioned in your testimony [1:42:07] the Office of Strategic Capital. [1:42:10] This, to me, [1:42:11] is one of these projects [1:42:13] that I think would be [1:42:15] absolutely critical [1:42:16] for our national security. [1:42:18] We talked about this just in [1:42:19] Admiral Paparo's testimony [1:42:21] last week. [1:42:22] He was talking about [1:42:23] the Alaska LNG project [1:42:24] as hugely strategic, [1:42:26] kind of a private sector, [1:42:28] American counter [1:42:29] to the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative. [1:42:32] I think it would be a great opportunity [1:42:33] to work with the Office [1:42:34] of Strategic Capital. [1:42:35] Can I get your commitment, [1:42:36] Mr. Secretary, [1:42:37] to do that on this project? [1:42:39] Yes, very aware [1:42:40] of that project. [1:42:41] And I think it's [1:42:41] the Office of Strategic Capital [1:42:43] is a great place [1:42:44] to look at partnering. [1:42:45] Great. [1:42:45] I appreciate that. [1:42:47] Finally, [1:42:47] I'm just going to ask, [1:42:49] 47 years of war [1:42:51] that we've had with Iran. [1:42:53] My colleagues [1:42:54] on the other side of the aisle, [1:42:55] you know, [1:42:55] they talk about [1:42:56] these civilian casualties. [1:43:01] These are all horrible. [1:43:03] Horrible, [1:43:03] whenever there's [1:43:04] any civilian casualties, [1:43:05] but just general, [1:43:07] do our forces [1:43:08] target civilians ever? [1:43:13] Sir, [1:43:14] never intentionally, [1:43:15] and I don't know [1:43:16] in any particular case [1:43:18] of unintentional, [1:43:18] but we don't do that. [1:43:20] That's not core [1:43:20] to our American values [1:43:21] or how we approach things. [1:43:23] That's one. [1:43:23] Do our adversaries [1:43:24] target civilians? [1:43:26] Yes, sir. [1:43:26] Like the KIDS force? [1:43:28] Yes, sir. [1:43:28] I think it's really important [1:43:29] as we keep bringing [1:43:30] this topic up [1:43:31] to remember who we are [1:43:33] and who our adversaries are. [1:43:34] Senator Sullivan, [1:43:36] do you ask unanimous consent [1:43:38] to have the two exhibits [1:43:39] added to the record? [1:43:40] Yes, sir, [1:43:41] Mr. Chairman. [1:43:41] Without objection, [1:43:42] that will be done. [1:43:43] Senator King. [1:43:45] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:43:46] We've had a lot of discussion [1:43:47] about Iran. [1:43:48] I'd like to talk about [1:43:49] several other aspects [1:43:50] of the budget. [1:43:51] The first is [1:43:52] the way the budget's [1:43:53] been constructed. [1:43:55] Ever since I've been here [1:43:56] until last year, [1:43:57] we've had bipartisan budgets [1:43:59] and bipartisan [1:44:00] National Defense Authorization Acts [1:44:03] and passed by majorities. [1:44:06] I voted for all of them. [1:44:08] And all of a sudden, [1:44:09] in this year, [1:44:10] 25% of the budget [1:44:11] is essentially [1:44:13] out of the process [1:44:14] and will be passed, [1:44:15] presumably, [1:44:16] through some kind [1:44:17] of reconciliation, [1:44:18] which is, by definition, [1:44:20] a partisan exercise. [1:44:22] Mr. Secretary, [1:44:23] why not all those items, [1:44:25] housing or Golden Dome, [1:44:27] whatever, [1:44:28] why aren't they [1:44:28] in the regular budget? [1:44:30] Why do we suddenly [1:44:30] have a two-part budget [1:44:32] where this committee [1:44:34] and the Congress [1:44:35] generally has oversight [1:44:36] and input [1:44:38] to a process [1:44:39] where a quarter [1:44:41] of the budget [1:44:41] is essentially [1:44:42] a slush fund? [1:44:44] Well, Senator, [1:44:45] I appreciate the question. [1:44:46] I wouldn't characterize [1:44:47] a quarter of it [1:44:48] as a slush fund, [1:44:49] but I recognize [1:44:50] that we see it [1:44:50] in totality [1:44:52] as a $1.5 trillion budget. [1:44:54] But why the separation? [1:44:56] Why the two pieces? [1:44:57] Why not just a regular budget? [1:44:57] As you know, [1:44:58] there are multiple dynamics [1:44:59] that play into [1:45:01] why there are multiple vehicles, [1:45:02] but we are fully committed [1:45:03] with working to the committee [1:45:04] to ensure [1:45:05] that the right vehicles [1:45:06] are utilized [1:45:06] to get precisely this amount, [1:45:08] $1.5 trillion. [1:45:09] Why should we... [1:45:10] You didn't answer my question. [1:45:11] Why are there two pieces? [1:45:13] Why not... [1:45:13] For time immemorial, [1:45:15] we've done budgets here. [1:45:17] We've never... [1:45:17] To my knowledge, [1:45:18] we've never used [1:45:19] this reconciliation process [1:45:20] for a defense budget before. [1:45:21] What's... [1:45:22] What's going on? [1:45:24] Why not... [1:45:24] My understanding [1:45:25] of the reason [1:45:26] for the vehicles [1:45:27] is to ensure [1:45:28] we actually get [1:45:29] to $1.5 trillion, [1:45:31] which is the most important [1:45:32] bottom line. [1:45:32] The most important bottom line [1:45:33] is that top line [1:45:34] of $1.5 trillion [1:45:35] to fund what we need, [1:45:36] and we think this process [1:45:37] is the most effective way [1:45:39] to get there, Senator. [1:45:40] Well, it... [1:45:41] What you're really saying [1:45:43] is we don't want to deal [1:45:43] with that pesky Congress [1:45:45] and their appropriation process. [1:45:46] I... [1:45:47] I think it's... [1:45:47] I think this is significant, [1:45:49] Mr. Chairman, [1:45:49] that we're... [1:45:50] We're basically abdicating [1:45:52] a quarter of our responsibility [1:45:53] in terms of this budget. [1:45:55] Let me move on. [1:45:56] One of the factors [1:45:59] of this budget [1:45:59] that hasn't gotten [1:46:00] any publicity [1:46:01] is that there's zero funding [1:46:03] for Ukraine. [1:46:04] That's correct, [1:46:04] isn't it, Mr. Hurst? [1:46:05] That's correct. [1:46:07] There's no USAI funding [1:46:08] in this budget. [1:46:09] And there was [1:46:09] $400 billion... [1:46:11] $400 million [1:46:12] that was appropriated [1:46:14] last year [1:46:15] by a bipartisan, [1:46:16] bicameral act of Congress. [1:46:18] What's become [1:46:19] of that money? [1:46:19] My understanding [1:46:20] is not a dollar [1:46:22] of it has been dispersed. [1:46:26] It was released [1:46:27] very recently, [1:46:28] and again, [1:46:28] we got these funds, [1:46:29] I believe, in March. [1:46:30] And it takes time [1:46:31] for funds to flow [1:46:32] through the department, [1:46:33] but it's going to get put [1:46:34] to work very shortly. [1:46:35] We're going to work [1:46:36] with the Ucom commander [1:46:36] to make sure we use these funds [1:46:37] in the most appropriate [1:46:38] way possible. [1:46:39] I didn't want Senator Sullivan [1:46:40] to be the only one [1:46:41] with an exhibit. [1:46:43] This indicates what's happened [1:46:44] to our support for Ukraine [1:46:46] over a period of years. [1:46:47] The orange bars [1:46:49] are U.S. support. [1:46:51] The blue bars are Europe. [1:46:52] As you see, [1:46:53] Europe is 99% [1:46:55] in the year 2026. [1:46:58] Same thing [1:46:58] with humanitarian [1:46:59] and other aid [1:47:00] to Ukraine. [1:47:02] And yet, [1:47:03] this is, [1:47:03] I believe, [1:47:04] an existential struggle [1:47:05] for the future [1:47:07] of democracy [1:47:07] where we had [1:47:08] an aggressive country [1:47:09] invade a neighboring country [1:47:11] without any justification [1:47:13] whatsoever. [1:47:14] And by the way, [1:47:15] that invading country [1:47:16] is the major winner [1:47:17] so far [1:47:18] of the war in Iran. [1:47:19] They've gotten, [1:47:21] the estimates are, [1:47:22] $40 to $80 billion [1:47:23] of additional revenues [1:47:25] from oil [1:47:26] and the relief of sanctions [1:47:27] as a result [1:47:27] of the war in Iran. [1:47:30] Secretary Hegseth, [1:47:31] why are we abandoning Ukraine? [1:47:33] Senator, [1:47:34] if you would hold [1:47:35] that chart back up, [1:47:36] I think that's [1:47:37] a beautiful chart. [1:47:39] I think that's [1:47:39] exactly what we want. [1:47:41] We want Europe [1:47:42] stepping up [1:47:43] and funding [1:47:43] and shouldering the burden. [1:47:45] They are rich countries [1:47:46] worth $20 trillion [1:47:47] versus economy [1:47:48] of $2 trillion. [1:47:49] Europe can step up. [1:47:50] Europe can fund it [1:47:51] and they have [1:47:52] through our Pearl Initiative [1:47:53] and through our European command. [1:47:54] That's exactly [1:47:55] what the American people [1:47:56] want to see [1:47:57] is other countries [1:47:58] stepping up [1:47:59] and funding that. [1:48:00] If it's that important [1:48:01] to Europe, [1:48:01] which I understand [1:48:02] why it is [1:48:02] and the incursion of Russia [1:48:03] and the bravery [1:48:04] of the Ukrainians, [1:48:05] then European countries [1:48:06] should pay for it [1:48:07] and that's exactly [1:48:08] what that chart says [1:48:09] and that's the administration policy. [1:48:10] So we don't have any, [1:48:11] we don't have any interest [1:48:12] in what happens in Ukraine. [1:48:13] Is that what you're saying? [1:48:14] It's only the Europeans? [1:48:16] I'm saying [1:48:17] the threat is far closer [1:48:18] to rich and capable countries [1:48:20] in Europe [1:48:20] and they should step up [1:48:21] to lead the charge [1:48:22] and that's why that chart [1:48:23] is a good thing to see. [1:48:24] They have stepped up [1:48:25] but I think [1:48:26] the American people [1:48:27] should understand [1:48:28] that we've stepped back, [1:48:29] in fact, [1:48:30] stepped back to the point [1:48:31] of abandoning. [1:48:32] This is a war [1:48:33] that never would have happened [1:48:34] under President Trump [1:48:34] and he supports [1:48:35] ending it through a deal [1:48:36] and he's pursued that. [1:48:38] So far it hasn't happened. [1:48:40] I'm out of time. [1:48:41] I want to talk about DTOs, [1:48:42] who designates [1:48:43] but we'll take that up later. [1:48:45] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:48:45] Thank you, Senator King. [1:48:48] Senator Schmidt. [1:48:49] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:48:51] And I'm following [1:48:52] my friend from Maine. [1:48:53] Missouri and Maine [1:48:54] came into the Union [1:48:55] at the same time [1:48:56] but we couldn't disagree [1:48:57] more on this particular point. [1:48:59] We may have to separate here. [1:49:00] I actually think [1:49:01] it's interesting [1:49:02] that Ukraine just came up [1:49:03] because we've heard [1:49:05] from my colleagues [1:49:06] on the other side [1:49:07] discussion about the cost [1:49:09] of what the ongoing [1:49:11] American effort. [1:49:12] There was never, [1:49:13] never a discussion [1:49:15] about the $200 billion [1:49:16] we were sending [1:49:17] to a foreign country [1:49:18] that's not even in NATO. [1:49:19] Never. [1:49:20] In fact, [1:49:21] when amendments were offered [1:49:22] for independent audits [1:49:24] of how that money was spent, [1:49:27] there was bipartisan opposition [1:49:28] to that kind of oversight. [1:49:30] So I find it really rich now [1:49:32] that there's a complaint [1:49:33] that we're not spending money [1:49:35] on Ukraine. [1:49:37] And by the way, [1:49:38] $30 billion [1:49:39] for salaries for bureaucrats, [1:49:42] pensions, [1:49:43] and social safety net programs [1:49:44] and government operations [1:49:46] to keep the state functioning [1:49:48] during wartime. [1:49:49] That's where American tax dollars [1:49:50] were going. [1:49:51] $30 billion for bureaucrats [1:49:52] in Ukraine. [1:49:54] And we just heard a speech [1:49:56] for more money for Ukraine. [1:49:58] Yet, [1:49:59] the $1.5 trillion [1:50:01] for this country [1:50:02] is being balked at. [1:50:04] I mean, [1:50:05] I've seen Ukraine flags [1:50:06] all over this capital [1:50:07] for three years. [1:50:09] At the same time, [1:50:10] the same people [1:50:11] call the president [1:50:12] of the United States [1:50:13] of this country [1:50:14] a Nazi. [1:50:16] So forgive me [1:50:18] if I feel like [1:50:20] we've lost our bearings [1:50:21] a little bit. [1:50:22] So I'm all for [1:50:24] the America First agenda. [1:50:26] I'm all for us [1:50:27] realigning our priorities. [1:50:28] I'm all for [1:50:29] the national defense strategies [1:50:31] that says [1:50:32] our core strategic interests [1:50:34] are the homeland, [1:50:35] the western hemisphere, [1:50:36] and the rising threat [1:50:37] in China. [1:50:37] And that means [1:50:39] our European allies [1:50:41] should step up. [1:50:42] If Vladimir Putin [1:50:43] is truly some existential threat [1:50:46] and the next Hitler [1:50:47] that's going to roll [1:50:48] through Europe, [1:50:49] you would think, [1:50:49] by the way, [1:50:49] he can't take Kiev. [1:50:51] So you can't have it both ways. [1:50:52] He hasn't made it to Kiev. [1:50:53] But they would step up. [1:50:56] And we better start demanding that [1:50:57] because if we want to meet [1:50:58] the challenges [1:50:59] of the 21st century [1:51:00] in China, [1:51:01] our priorities, [1:51:03] our focus, [1:51:04] has to be [1:51:04] somewhere else. [1:51:06] It doesn't mean abandonment. [1:51:07] It just means a true partnership [1:51:08] with our European allies [1:51:10] who for a very, very long time [1:51:12] have not stepped up. [1:51:13] I want to ask you, [1:51:14] Mr. Secretary, [1:51:15] in your first year, [1:51:16] one of the things I think [1:51:17] that's really gone towards [1:51:18] this morale [1:51:18] and recruitment boom [1:51:20] that we've seen [1:51:21] through your leadership [1:51:22] and President Trump [1:51:23] was finally taking on [1:51:25] the sort of cultural Marxism [1:51:26] that had taken hold [1:51:28] from the highest levels [1:51:29] of leadership [1:51:30] from the President [1:51:30] of the United States [1:51:31] to your predecessor, [1:51:32] this obsession with DEI. [1:51:34] Could you just walk through [1:51:35] maybe a, [1:51:37] the worst example [1:51:38] that you saw [1:51:39] and a way that you addressed that [1:51:40] and how it was affecting morale? [1:51:43] Well, thank you, Senator. [1:51:43] First of all, [1:51:44] I want to fully associate myself [1:51:47] with the first two and a half minutes [1:51:48] of your comments [1:51:49] and I appreciate that perspective [1:51:50] very much so. [1:51:51] I would note [1:51:52] $30 billion [1:51:52] for bureaucrats in Ukraine [1:51:54] is more than the bill [1:51:55] that we've talked about today [1:51:56] for a existential [1:51:59] and critically important war [1:52:00] to ensure that Iran [1:52:01] doesn't get a nuclear weapon. [1:52:03] That's worth noting. [1:52:04] I haven't talked about it [1:52:05] as much in these hearings [1:52:07] because this is a budget hearing [1:52:09] about $1.5 trillion [1:52:10] that's historic and significant. [1:52:12] But underwriting the change [1:52:14] that we've seen [1:52:14] at our department [1:52:15] was a laser focus [1:52:16] on getting back to basics. [1:52:18] And the key word [1:52:19] to that is merit. [1:52:21] We had a department [1:52:22] that was obsessed [1:52:23] with gender, [1:52:24] ideology, [1:52:25] and race, [1:52:27] diversity, equity, [1:52:27] and inclusion. [1:52:28] In fact, [1:52:29] the mantra you would hear [1:52:30] dripping from the lips [1:52:32] of generals [1:52:32] with a serious look [1:52:33] on their face [1:52:34] was our diversity [1:52:35] is our strength, [1:52:37] which is the single [1:52:38] dumbest phrase [1:52:39] in military history. [1:52:41] Of course, [1:52:41] our diversity [1:52:42] is not our strength. [1:52:43] Our unity [1:52:44] is our strength, [1:52:45] our shared purpose, [1:52:46] the flag we wear [1:52:47] and the constitution [1:52:49] we serve to defend. [1:52:50] And when you clear [1:52:51] that debris away, [1:52:52] whether it's Marxist ideologies [1:52:54] or social engineering [1:52:55] or political correctness [1:52:57] or quotas based [1:52:59] on gender and diversity, [1:53:00] you get the best [1:53:01] of the best rising up [1:53:03] regardless of gender, [1:53:04] regardless of race, [1:53:05] motivated by that environment [1:53:07] where merit reigns, [1:53:09] it's accountability, [1:53:10] standards, [1:53:11] lethality, [1:53:12] readiness, [1:53:12] training, [1:53:13] all the debris [1:53:14] wiped away. [1:53:15] That is the secret sauce [1:53:17] of the revival [1:53:18] of the War Department [1:53:19] and why Americans [1:53:20] are attracted [1:53:21] to serving in it [1:53:22] and why those inside it, [1:53:23] why morale is sky high. [1:53:25] And any insinuation [1:53:26] that it is not [1:53:27] are coming from folks [1:53:28] who haven't been [1:53:29] in our units recently. [1:53:30] Go visit the troops [1:53:31] at every level [1:53:32] and their morale [1:53:32] is at record levels. [1:53:33] And I want to talk [1:53:34] about morale [1:53:34] with the 15 seconds [1:53:35] that I have left. [1:53:36] I want to thank you [1:53:36] for coming to St. Louis [1:53:38] for your Arsenal of Freedom Tour [1:53:39] where the next generation aircraft, [1:53:41] the F-47, [1:53:42] is being built [1:53:43] by the hardworking men [1:53:44] and women in Missouri [1:53:44] who take a tremendous amount [1:53:46] of pride [1:53:46] for that aircraft [1:53:48] that's going to go further, [1:53:49] see further, go faster, [1:53:51] have a bigger payload. [1:53:52] And I know there's [1:53:53] another decision coming [1:53:54] with the F-A-XX, [1:53:55] but really appreciate [1:53:56] your leadership [1:53:56] and thanks for coming. [1:53:57] Thank you, Senator. [1:53:58] Thank you, Senator Schmitt. [1:54:01] Senator King, [1:54:01] do you wish to ask [1:54:03] unanimous consent [1:54:03] to include your exhibit [1:54:06] in the record? [1:54:07] Yes, please. [1:54:08] Without objection. [1:54:09] That will be done. [1:54:09] Senator Warren. [1:54:10] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:54:12] So Americans are paying [1:54:14] a high price [1:54:15] for Donald Trump's war [1:54:16] with Iran. [1:54:16] We've got 14 service members [1:54:18] who are dead, [1:54:19] over 400 more [1:54:20] who are wounded. [1:54:22] Prices are rising [1:54:23] for nearly every American family. [1:54:26] But someone is profiting [1:54:29] off Trump's war. [1:54:31] Insiders who know [1:54:32] what's going on [1:54:33] and who place bets [1:54:34] on that inside information. [1:54:37] On March 23rd, [1:54:39] just 14 minutes [1:54:40] before Trump [1:54:41] unexpectedly posted [1:54:43] about, quote, [1:54:44] very good conversations [1:54:46] on ending the war, [1:54:48] traders suddenly [1:54:49] bet $500 million [1:54:51] on the price of oil, [1:54:53] which, once Trump [1:54:55] made his announcement, [1:54:57] immediately dropped. [1:54:58] It happened again [1:54:59] on April 7th [1:55:01] and then again [1:55:02] on April 21st. [1:55:04] A surge in oil bets, [1:55:06] then a Trump post, [1:55:07] and then a huge shift [1:55:09] in oil prices [1:55:10] in just the space [1:55:12] of minutes. [1:55:13] It looks like insiders [1:55:15] have been making out [1:55:16] like bandits [1:55:17] using secret information [1:55:19] about the war. [1:55:21] Now, one U.S. soldier [1:55:22] has been charged, [1:55:23] but that was [1:55:24] for betting [1:55:24] on capturing Maduro [1:55:26] months ago. [1:55:28] Not a single person [1:55:29] has been charged [1:55:30] in the many, many, [1:55:32] many trades [1:55:33] over the Middle East war. [1:55:35] So, Secretary Hegseth, [1:55:37] do you have [1:55:38] any explanation [1:55:39] for these perfectly timed [1:55:42] spikes in trading activity [1:55:46] other than insider trading? [1:55:50] Senator, [1:55:50] all I can tell you [1:55:51] is that everything [1:55:52] we've done in our department, [1:55:53] everything we've done [1:55:54] with information [1:55:55] in working with the White House [1:55:56] and across the interagency [1:55:57] has been completely above board. [1:56:00] Well, so what does it mean? [1:56:01] Do you have [1:56:02] any other explanation [1:56:04] other than insider trading? [1:56:06] Do you have a story [1:56:07] for why just minutes [1:56:09] before there's an announcement [1:56:11] there's a surge [1:56:12] in trading activity? [1:56:15] Senator, [1:56:16] I'm more than focused [1:56:16] on doing my job [1:56:18] and ensuring we execute properly, [1:56:19] which thankfully, [1:56:20] under this administration, [1:56:22] our troops have done [1:56:22] incredible things [1:56:23] in all these missions. [1:56:25] My job [1:56:25] in all of those moments [1:56:27] is to make sure [1:56:27] we're prepared. [1:56:28] And that's part of the reason [1:56:29] why we've been so successful [1:56:30] in these raids, [1:56:31] in these efforts, [1:56:32] is that this joint force [1:56:33] is prepared. [1:56:34] So you're saying [1:56:34] you're not paying any attention [1:56:35] to this insider trading. [1:56:36] Is that what you're telling me? [1:56:38] That you've paid no attention [1:56:39] to this? [1:56:39] You haven't noticed it? [1:56:40] You haven't done anything about it? [1:56:41] What I'm saying is [1:56:43] we're focused on our mission [1:56:44] of executing [1:56:45] for the American people [1:56:46] and what happens [1:56:47] in markets is not, [1:56:48] in betting markets [1:56:49] is not something [1:56:50] we're involved in. [1:56:51] What happens in betting markets [1:56:52] doesn't matter to you, [1:56:54] even if the information [1:56:55] may be coming [1:56:56] from insiders [1:56:58] in your office? [1:57:00] Senator, [1:57:00] it's not something [1:57:01] we're involved in at all. [1:57:02] And of course, [1:57:02] we take operational security [1:57:04] at every level [1:57:04] very seriously. [1:57:05] In fact, [1:57:05] no one's taken operational security [1:57:07] more seriously than us. [1:57:10] If you look at [1:57:11] what it required [1:57:11] to keep secret [1:57:12] Midnight Hammer [1:57:13] and Operation Maduro, [1:57:15] the absolute resolve [1:57:17] with Maduro [1:57:18] and the steps we've taken, [1:57:20] no one's been tighter [1:57:21] about ensuring [1:57:22] that operational security [1:57:23] is insured. [1:57:24] Any steps to deal [1:57:25] with insider trading [1:57:26] out of your office? [1:57:29] We have, [1:57:30] we would ensure [1:57:31] at every level [1:57:32] that inside information [1:57:33] is properly safeguarded. [1:57:33] I take that as a note. [1:57:34] All right. [1:57:35] Well, obviously you're not. [1:57:37] I'm also concerned [1:57:39] about recent reporting [1:57:40] on your own financial dealings [1:57:42] with regard to profiting [1:57:44] from the war in Iran. [1:57:45] The Financial Times reported [1:57:47] that your broker [1:57:48] tried to buy hundreds [1:57:49] of shares [1:57:49] in a BlackRock fund [1:57:51] invested in defense companies [1:57:53] just before the war began. [1:57:55] The law clearly prohibits [1:57:56] the secretary... [1:57:57] That entire story is false, [1:57:59] has been from the beginning [1:58:00] and was made up [1:58:01] out of whole cloth. [1:58:02] And anybody that looks at it [1:58:03] sees how it was worded [1:58:04] from the beginning [1:58:05] to make it look like [1:58:06] I was involved in something [1:58:07] I had nothing to do [1:58:08] and never have. [1:58:09] So any insinuation [1:58:10] that I've ever profited [1:58:11] other than serving this nation, [1:58:13] what I give, [1:58:15] what you give, [1:58:16] what others give, [1:58:16] I'm not looking for money. [1:58:17] I don't do it for money. [1:58:18] I don't do it for profit. [1:58:19] I don't do it for stocks. [1:58:20] And that's part of the reason [1:58:21] why I'm able to be effective [1:58:22] in this job [1:58:22] because no one owns me. [1:58:24] No one owns this department. [1:58:26] No one owns this president. [1:58:27] And we can execute [1:58:28] for the American people [1:58:29] and we do. [1:58:30] The law clearly prohibits [1:58:32] the Secretary of Defense [1:58:33] from owning stock [1:58:34] in the 10 biggest [1:58:36] defense contractors. [1:58:38] Other senators and I [1:58:39] sent you a letter [1:58:40] with detailed questions [1:58:41] about this [1:58:42] and you have not given us [1:58:44] a response. [1:58:45] So I'd like to hear you say, [1:58:47] did you, [1:58:48] through your broker [1:58:49] at Morgan Stanley [1:58:50] or otherwise, [1:58:51] seek to invest [1:58:52] in any defense-related funds [1:58:54] right before Trump [1:58:55] started the Iran war? [1:58:59] I'll give it to you [1:59:00] as a big, [1:59:01] fat negative. [1:59:03] Then let me ask you [1:59:04] a second question. [1:59:05] Is your broker [1:59:06] getting your personal sign-off [1:59:08] on any investment [1:59:10] in individual stocks? [1:59:11] Bigger, fatter, negative. [1:59:14] He's not getting your sign-off [1:59:15] before he makes investments [1:59:17] in defense stocks? [1:59:18] Can I refer you to your [1:59:19] offense agreement? [1:59:19] I'm not making investments, [1:59:21] Senator. [1:59:22] I am asking, [1:59:23] does he know [1:59:23] that he has to get your sign-off [1:59:25] before he does that? [1:59:27] Of course. [1:59:27] I don't know what you're looking for, [1:59:29] but you ain't gonna find it. [1:59:30] Thank you. [1:59:31] Thank you, Senator. [1:59:32] I would like to enter [1:59:34] into the record, [1:59:35] the ethics agreement [1:59:36] that the Secretary of Defense [1:59:38] has signed, [1:59:39] that he will sign off personally [1:59:41] before his broker [1:59:43] makes any attempt [1:59:44] to buy defense stocks. [1:59:46] Is there objection? [1:59:47] Thank you. [1:59:48] Without objection, [1:59:49] it will be admitted. [1:59:51] Senator Banks. [1:59:54] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:59:54] Secretary Hexer, [1:59:55] you're doing a great job. [1:59:57] I've been in Washington [1:59:59] for 10 years, [2:00:00] several secretaries of defense, [2:00:03] now Secretary of War. [2:00:05] You're the best that we've had [2:00:06] since I've been in Washington. [2:00:07] What you've done [2:00:07] to restore readiness, [2:00:10] restore military recruitment, [2:00:11] get the Pentagon focus [2:00:12] on warfighting, [2:00:13] is second to none. [2:00:15] And I appreciate what you [2:00:16] and President Trump [2:00:17] and General Cain [2:00:18] are doing very much. [2:00:19] In fact, [2:00:20] General Cain, [2:00:21] according to the department's [2:00:22] 2025 China Military Power Report. [2:00:26] Quote, [2:00:27] China believes [2:00:28] the next revolution [2:00:29] in military affairs [2:00:30] will occur [2:00:31] when militaries transition [2:00:32] to intelligentized warfare [2:00:34] and fully integrate [2:00:36] artificial intelligence, [2:00:38] big data, [2:00:39] advanced computing, [2:00:40] and other technologies [2:00:42] into the joint force. [2:00:43] End quote. [2:00:45] Can you describe, [2:00:46] General, [2:00:46] in greater detail, [2:00:48] how the PLA is using AI [2:00:50] to enhance its military capabilities? [2:00:54] You bet, [2:00:55] Senator. [2:00:56] You know, [2:00:56] they are attempting [2:00:57] to integrate AI [2:00:59] across the range [2:01:01] of their warfighting functions, [2:01:02] which extends [2:01:03] to command and control, [2:01:06] information advantage, [2:01:08] intelligence, [2:01:09] certainly kinetic [2:01:11] and non-kinetic capabilities, [2:01:14] and to a certain extent, [2:01:15] sustainment. [2:01:16] I'll note that [2:01:17] so are we. [2:01:19] And in many cases, [2:01:20] we are out in front [2:01:21] of them. [2:01:22] I want to commend [2:01:23] our chief digital [2:01:24] and artificial intelligence officers [2:01:26] inside the joint force [2:01:28] at the COCOMS [2:01:29] with the services [2:01:30] who are also leaning [2:01:32] very far in [2:01:33] as we march towards [2:01:35] a digitized joint force [2:01:37] that allows us to cease [2:01:39] and see and command [2:01:41] and control the force better. [2:01:43] The China Military Power Report [2:01:45] also goes on [2:01:47] to note that [2:01:47] the Chinese AI sector [2:01:49] remains, quote, [2:01:50] constrained by its limited access [2:01:53] to high-performance AI chips. [2:01:58] General Kane, [2:01:58] how big of an advantage [2:02:00] is it for the American warfighter [2:02:02] that America's arsenal [2:02:04] of compute [2:02:05] is bigger than China's? [2:02:07] Sir, it's critical to us. [2:02:12] And, you know, [2:02:12] while I acknowledge [2:02:13] there's all kinds [2:02:15] of chip issues [2:02:16] in this, [2:02:17] it is important [2:02:18] to us [2:02:18] to continue [2:02:19] to scale at that. [2:02:20] And I'll highlight [2:02:21] a lot of the work [2:02:22] going on up at Fort Meade [2:02:23] that the committee's helped [2:02:25] to advance [2:02:25] in the cyber capabilities, [2:02:27] so we appreciate [2:02:27] the help of that. [2:02:28] If that advantage [2:02:29] were eroded [2:02:30] and China were able [2:02:31] to develop [2:02:31] more advanced AI capabilities [2:02:33] as a result, [2:02:35] what are some of the potential [2:02:36] consequences [2:02:37] for American warfighters? [2:02:39] Well, sir, [2:02:39] it could certainly [2:02:41] put us at risk, [2:02:42] and that's why [2:02:43] we're leaning in so hard. [2:02:45] There's always [2:02:46] a balance [2:02:46] between commerce [2:02:48] and protection. [2:02:51] I acknowledge [2:02:51] those are policy matters, [2:02:53] I think, [2:02:53] is what you're [2:02:54] starting to get towards. [2:02:56] But on a pure [2:02:57] military-only standpoint, [2:02:59] that we would see [2:03:01] some defense [2:03:02] in-depth eroded [2:03:03] from that. [2:03:03] Secretary Hex said, [2:03:05] do you agree [2:03:05] that enhanced [2:03:06] Chinese AI capabilities [2:03:07] could put [2:03:09] American service members [2:03:10] at risk? [2:03:13] Senator, [2:03:13] we absolutely [2:03:14] have to stay ahead. [2:03:16] The advantage [2:03:17] that AI provides [2:03:18] applied to any number [2:03:19] of capabilities, [2:03:20] whether it's [2:03:20] domain awareness, [2:03:22] targeting cycles, [2:03:23] you name it, [2:03:24] AI and leveraging it, [2:03:25] and that's why [2:03:25] we've made it [2:03:26] the forefront. [2:03:27] I mean, [2:03:27] it's AI first [2:03:28] with everything [2:03:28] that we do, [2:03:29] integrating it [2:03:30] at every potential [2:03:31] echelon [2:03:31] to ensure [2:03:32] we can respond faster. [2:03:33] If we're better [2:03:35] at that [2:03:36] than any adversary is, [2:03:37] it's going to give us [2:03:37] an advantage [2:03:38] and we have to maintain that. [2:03:39] I agree. [2:03:39] Do you agree [2:03:40] that we should do [2:03:41] everything in our power [2:03:42] to ensure [2:03:42] that American service members [2:03:44] go into battle [2:03:45] with an overwhelming [2:03:47] and fear-inducing [2:03:49] technological advantage, [2:03:50] particularly with AI? [2:03:53] Always. [2:03:54] Overwhelming [2:03:54] is the goal [2:03:55] in every scenario. [2:03:57] Earlier this year, [2:03:58] the Pentagon issued [2:03:59] updated guidelines [2:04:00] that prohibit [2:04:01] department funds [2:04:02] from supporting grants [2:04:03] and contracts [2:04:03] involving fundamental [2:04:05] research collaboration [2:04:07] with blacklisted [2:04:08] Chinese entities. [2:04:10] How important [2:04:11] are those restrictions [2:04:12] to safeguarding [2:04:13] our technological leadership? [2:04:16] Have to have them, [2:04:17] especially when you look [2:04:18] at the power of models [2:04:19] and all of those things. [2:04:20] You have connections [2:04:21] to entities [2:04:22] that could have connections [2:04:23] to your adversary [2:04:23] and you can have [2:04:25] degradation [2:04:26] of your advantage. [2:04:27] Again, [2:04:27] this is where I appreciate [2:04:28] your leadership, [2:04:29] Mr. Secretary, [2:04:31] which has been second [2:04:31] to none. [2:04:32] And I know that [2:04:32] you will work [2:04:34] with Congress [2:04:34] to help codify [2:04:35] those restrictions [2:04:36] and encourage [2:04:37] taxpayer dollars [2:04:38] to never advance [2:04:39] the capabilities [2:04:40] of our enemies [2:04:41] and our adversaries. [2:04:42] I appreciate [2:04:43] both of your leadership. [2:04:46] We've come a long way [2:04:47] in a couple of years [2:04:48] from, I mean, [2:04:49] the night and day difference [2:04:50] between the last [2:04:51] administration [2:04:52] and this administration [2:04:53] is apparent [2:04:54] to every Hoosier [2:04:55] that I talk to. [2:04:56] So I appreciate [2:04:57] your leadership. [2:04:57] I yield back. [2:04:58] Thank you very much, [2:04:59] Senator Banks. [2:05:00] Senator Peters. [2:05:01] Thank you, [2:05:02] Mr. Chairman, [2:05:02] ranking member. [2:05:03] Gentlemen, [2:05:04] welcome to the committee. [2:05:05] I appreciate [2:05:06] this discussion. [2:05:07] I'll just start off. [2:05:08] The number one question [2:05:09] I get when I'm back [2:05:10] home from people [2:05:11] is basically, [2:05:12] very simply, [2:05:13] when will this war end? [2:05:14] We know the costs [2:05:16] that the American people [2:05:17] are paying, [2:05:18] both at higher fuel costs, [2:05:20] our farmers are paying [2:05:21] because of fertilizer costs. [2:05:22] We know that [2:05:23] the whole world economy [2:05:25] is paying a great deal [2:05:27] for this war. [2:05:28] And basically, [2:05:30] as I think that through, [2:05:31] and this is what [2:05:31] I want to talk to you about, [2:05:32] is that we all know [2:05:33] that it's a whole lot easier [2:05:34] to go to war [2:05:35] than it is to get out of war. [2:05:37] That's always the tough question. [2:05:40] And we've got to figure that out. [2:05:42] And there are some folks [2:05:44] who've written [2:05:44] quite a bit about this. [2:05:46] One text on war [2:05:47] by Carl von Klauswitz. [2:05:49] Mr. Secretary, [2:05:50] I'm sure you're familiar [2:05:51] with the book. [2:05:53] I know all of the men [2:05:54] and women in uniform are. [2:05:55] It's the most widely read, [2:05:57] most influential [2:05:58] military strategy book [2:06:00] in Western history, [2:06:01] which is pretty, pretty broad. [2:06:03] And it is the core curriculum [2:06:05] that is read [2:06:06] in all the war colleges. [2:06:08] I read it when I was [2:06:09] at the Navy War College [2:06:11] taking courses. [2:06:13] It's part of [2:06:14] what the U.S. military [2:06:15] thinks about [2:06:16] when to go to war [2:06:17] and then how to get [2:06:18] out of the war. [2:06:18] And one of those [2:06:20] core principles [2:06:21] it starts with [2:06:22] is basically [2:06:23] war is the continuation [2:06:25] of politics [2:06:26] by other means. [2:06:27] That everybody knows [2:06:28] that quote [2:06:28] who's worn the uniform [2:06:29] and others too. [2:06:31] And basically, [2:06:32] it means there's [2:06:32] two things about that. [2:06:33] It's politics to get [2:06:34] in the war [2:06:35] and it's politics [2:06:35] to get out of the war. [2:06:37] And in between, [2:06:38] we rely on the men [2:06:39] and women in the military [2:06:40] to carry out those policies. [2:06:42] So I want to be clear, [2:06:43] and I think I speak [2:06:44] for all of my colleagues, [2:06:45] is that we know [2:06:46] the military plays [2:06:47] an important part. [2:06:48] They need to do the job. [2:06:49] And nobody, [2:06:50] nobody questions [2:06:51] the amazing work [2:06:53] that our men and women [2:06:53] in the U.S. military [2:06:54] have done [2:06:55] and continue to do. [2:06:57] They have performed [2:06:58] absolutely brilliantly, [2:07:00] and we applaud [2:07:01] all that they have done. [2:07:02] However, [2:07:03] what we do question [2:07:04] is the politics part. [2:07:06] It's a continuation [2:07:06] of politics. [2:07:07] So it's our political leaders [2:07:08] that get us into war [2:07:09] and our political leaders [2:07:11] who have to get us [2:07:12] out of that war, [2:07:14] which falls on you, [2:07:15] Mr. Secretary Hexhaf, [2:07:17] and others [2:07:17] in the administration, [2:07:18] including the president [2:07:19] and his commander-in-chief. [2:07:21] So, Secretary, [2:07:22] are you familiar [2:07:22] with the concept [2:07:24] in that book [2:07:24] of Center of Gravity? [2:07:28] Sure. [2:07:29] So Center of Gravity [2:07:30] is basically, [2:07:31] as you know, [2:07:32] it's basically [2:07:33] the hub of all the power [2:07:34] and movement. [2:07:35] Everything depends on it. [2:07:37] And Colossus will say, [2:07:38] if you don't take out [2:07:39] the center of gravity, [2:07:40] it's very difficult [2:07:41] to win the war. [2:07:43] You can have tactical successes, [2:07:45] you can have military successes, [2:07:46] but if you're not focused [2:07:47] on that, [2:07:47] you're not going to be able [2:07:49] to win. [2:07:50] Basically, [2:07:51] he talks about military strikes [2:07:52] are tactical, [2:07:53] and tactical success [2:07:54] doesn't necessarily create [2:07:56] the political conditions [2:07:57] necessary to get the parties [2:07:59] to the table [2:08:00] to negotiate [2:08:01] and get it done. [2:08:02] So we've got to focus on that. [2:08:03] So my question for you, [2:08:05] Mr. Secretary, [2:08:06] what is the center [2:08:06] of gravity for Iran? [2:08:10] Well, [2:08:10] the center of gravity, [2:08:11] as the president has seen it [2:08:12] and as I see it, [2:08:13] and he's talked about [2:08:14] for 30 years, [2:08:15] is their pursuit [2:08:16] of a nuclear weapon [2:08:17] and what they could do [2:08:18] with that in pursuit [2:08:19] as an extension [2:08:20] of the radical ideology [2:08:22] they have professed [2:08:23] since the beginning [2:08:23] of their revolution. [2:08:24] So the prophetic ideology [2:08:28] they profess [2:08:28] alongside the most dangerous [2:08:30] weapon in the world [2:08:31] would be the center of gravity [2:08:32] of the rationality [2:08:33] of this undertaking, [2:08:34] which you understand. [2:08:35] I appreciate it. [2:08:35] I'll elaborate more. [2:08:36] I appreciate it. [2:08:37] General Cain, [2:08:38] you know more about [2:08:39] Clausewitz and strategy [2:08:41] than I will ever know, [2:08:42] including all the folks [2:08:43] behind you. [2:08:43] What would you consider [2:08:44] the center of gravity [2:08:45] as defined by Clausewitz [2:08:47] in this type of war? [2:08:49] Well, sir, [2:08:50] you're not going to love [2:08:52] this answer, [2:08:52] but I hope you'll respect it. [2:08:54] War is politics [2:08:56] by any other means. [2:08:57] Right. [2:08:58] And the political side [2:08:59] of that necessitates [2:09:00] that our political leaders [2:09:01] determine what is [2:09:02] the center of gravity [2:09:03] associated with that. [2:09:04] From a military-only perspective, [2:09:07] there's a variety [2:09:08] of things academically [2:09:09] that we could look at [2:09:10] for center of gravity [2:09:11] from leadership [2:09:12] to will [2:09:12] to capabilities [2:09:13] to intent. [2:09:15] But I'll defer [2:09:15] to our political leaders [2:09:17] to determine what that is. [2:09:17] Okay, that's fine. [2:09:18] That's fair. [2:09:18] I don't like it. [2:09:19] You're right. [2:09:19] I know, sir. [2:09:20] And I know you know [2:09:21] the answer to that [2:09:21] and you're just not telling me. [2:09:23] I get why you're doing that. [2:09:24] My inner marshal. [2:09:24] But I would say, [2:09:25] you know, [2:09:25] other observers say [2:09:26] that basically [2:09:27] it's not the leader. [2:09:29] Usually if you take out [2:09:30] a leader, [2:09:30] that doesn't necessarily [2:09:31] make the changes. [2:09:33] In Iran's case, [2:09:34] it's probably [2:09:35] the Islamic Revolutionary Guard. [2:09:38] That's the center of gravity. [2:09:39] They're the ones [2:09:40] that control the country [2:09:40] and they're very diverse [2:09:42] to do that. [2:09:42] The American's center of gravity [2:09:45] is probably our economy [2:09:46] and our ability [2:09:46] to maintain [2:09:47] public opinion support. [2:09:49] We already know [2:09:49] the public isn't there. [2:09:50] We know the impact [2:09:51] to our economy. [2:09:52] And central to that [2:09:53] is the leverage. [2:09:53] And I'm running out of time here, [2:09:54] but the central of leverage [2:09:55] is the Strait of Hormuz. [2:09:58] That that is bottom line. [2:10:00] We have to open that up. [2:10:02] We have to take that away [2:10:03] from Iran. [2:10:04] The fact that we haven't [2:10:05] done that yet [2:10:05] and we're 60 days in, [2:10:07] we're just now [2:10:08] bringing minesweepers [2:10:10] from the Pacific in there. [2:10:12] We have some unmanned [2:10:13] of the opportunities, [2:10:16] but we've got to have [2:10:16] the capacity to do that. [2:10:18] It was clear, [2:10:19] even if there was a plan [2:10:20] to keep the Straits open, [2:10:22] it was not going [2:10:23] to be implemented [2:10:24] because the assets [2:10:25] were not positioned [2:10:26] in a place [2:10:26] to actually open the Straits. [2:10:29] If they were, [2:10:29] it would have been, [2:10:30] we would have seen [2:10:31] those happening right now. [2:10:33] We're not. [2:10:34] So we're missing [2:10:34] the point here. [2:10:35] The center of gravity [2:10:36] is going to be [2:10:36] bringing down [2:10:37] the government of Iran [2:10:39] in a way [2:10:40] that they will want [2:10:41] to have a peace treaty [2:10:42] so we can protect [2:10:43] our country [2:10:44] from having nuclear weapons [2:10:45] pointed our way. [2:10:46] But the center of gravity [2:10:47] is going to be, [2:10:48] in a lot of ways, [2:10:49] is going to be focused [2:10:50] on what happens [2:10:50] on the Straits. [2:10:51] And Mr. Secretary, [2:10:53] we've got to see action [2:10:54] a whole lot sooner [2:10:55] in the Straits. [2:10:55] The world community needs it. [2:10:56] We're not going to bring [2:10:57] this war to an end [2:10:58] until we seize control [2:11:00] of the Straits [2:11:00] in a way that opens them back. [2:11:01] Which in part is why [2:11:02] we have a blockade [2:11:03] that has been impenetrable [2:11:04] for the Iranians [2:11:05] because they don't have [2:11:06] a conventional navy [2:11:07] to contest it. [2:11:08] Which means we control [2:11:09] the Straits. [2:11:10] The time of Senator Peters [2:11:12] has expired. [2:11:14] Let me observe [2:11:16] that I very much [2:11:17] appreciate the senator [2:11:20] from Michigan [2:11:21] suggesting ways [2:11:23] in which our effort [2:11:25] in Iran [2:11:26] could be more successful. [2:11:28] I do appreciate that. [2:11:29] And let me also observe, [2:11:30] Senator Kaine, [2:11:31] that civilian control [2:11:33] goes back well beyond Marshall. [2:11:38] It goes back [2:11:39] to George Washington [2:11:41] who was wise enough [2:11:42] to resign his commission [2:11:43] to the elected membership [2:11:46] of the government [2:11:47] at that time. [2:11:49] Senator Sheehy, [2:11:50] you are recognized. [2:11:53] I think it's important [2:11:54] to note that [2:11:55] the objective [2:11:57] is not to get out [2:11:58] of the war. [2:11:58] The objective [2:11:59] is to win the war, [2:12:00] not to get out of it. [2:12:01] And I think [2:12:03] we've allowed the narrative [2:12:04] to shift so off target [2:12:05] here. [2:12:06] President Trump [2:12:07] did not start this war. [2:12:08] We did not start this war. [2:12:10] These radical, [2:12:11] barbarian, savage clerics [2:12:13] who have started [2:12:13] killing Americans [2:12:14] 47 years ago [2:12:15] in a unilateral campaign [2:12:17] of terror, murder, [2:12:19] treason, kidnapping, [2:12:21] torture, [2:12:21] have been murdering [2:12:23] our countrymen [2:12:23] all over this world [2:12:24] almost every single year, [2:12:27] hijacking airplanes, [2:12:28] hijacking cruise liners, [2:12:29] taking our embassies, [2:12:30] blowing up our embassies, [2:12:31] blowing up our barracks, [2:12:32] blowing up our ships, [2:12:34] capturing our soldiers [2:12:34] and murdering them [2:12:35] in brutal ways. [2:12:37] They started this war. [2:12:40] And it would be [2:12:40] a lot easier [2:12:41] to beat them [2:12:42] if we didn't have [2:12:43] administrations [2:12:43] shoveling hundreds [2:12:44] of billions of dollars [2:12:45] into their pockets [2:12:46] while they're actively [2:12:46] fighting our own people, [2:12:48] while our own uniformed [2:12:49] service members [2:12:49] have been fighting [2:12:50] this murderous regime. [2:12:52] And we have presidents [2:12:53] quite literally [2:12:54] shipping pallets of cash [2:12:55] to pay these terrorists off. [2:12:58] It's been a disgrace. [2:12:59] It's been an embarrassment [2:13:00] to this country [2:13:01] for far too long. [2:13:03] But back to the point, [2:13:04] General Cain, [2:13:04] I have a specific question [2:13:05] for you. [2:13:06] I think in this day and age, [2:13:08] we all know that basically [2:13:09] every single operation [2:13:11] that we partake in, [2:13:12] whether it's stealth bombers, [2:13:13] whether it's a blockade, [2:13:15] our special operations forces [2:13:16] are a fundamental shaping [2:13:18] and priority component [2:13:19] to all those. [2:13:20] Would you agree? [2:13:22] Yes, Senator, I would. [2:13:24] And I think for the last [2:13:25] about 15 years, [2:13:27] the special operations [2:13:27] community budget [2:13:28] has been largely flat, [2:13:30] even adjusted for inflation. [2:13:32] And yet, continuously, [2:13:34] we call on those warriors [2:13:35] to deliver the impossible. [2:13:38] And they pretty much do. [2:13:39] We were reminded just a few weeks ago, [2:13:41] even after the amazing Maduro raid, [2:13:43] when we had to rescue [2:13:44] one of our F-15 crewmen, [2:13:45] yet again, our community came up [2:13:47] and did something that [2:13:48] probably most people thought [2:13:50] wasn't possible. [2:13:51] And they did an amazing job. [2:13:53] But we cannot continue [2:13:54] to call on a tiny fraction [2:13:56] of our military [2:13:57] to carry such a heavy load [2:13:59] and to have such an op tempo [2:14:00] without the appropriate resources. [2:14:02] So I'd like to hear your thoughts [2:14:04] on how we can not just increase [2:14:06] the budget, [2:14:06] but make sure we're shaping [2:14:07] their budget in a way [2:14:08] that ensures that those warriors [2:14:09] are getting the direct support [2:14:11] for training and sustainment, [2:14:13] but also the platforms [2:14:14] that they need [2:14:15] from mini submarines [2:14:17] to unmanned aircraft [2:14:19] to manned aircraft [2:14:20] and the platforms [2:14:21] that are very unique [2:14:21] for their mission [2:14:22] are furnished and deployed rapidly. [2:14:25] So I'd like to talk [2:14:26] about the percentage increase [2:14:27] of SOCOM's budget, [2:14:28] how we affect that [2:14:29] and how fast we can do it. [2:14:30] Well, sir, I'll just, [2:14:31] I'll just highlight [2:14:32] my gratitude [2:14:33] and appreciation [2:14:34] for the entirety [2:14:35] of the SOCOM joint force [2:14:37] at Echelon [2:14:38] and the work that they do. [2:14:40] You know, [2:14:41] I'll leave the budget numbers [2:14:42] and the increased percentages [2:14:44] to my civilian leadership, [2:14:46] but echo to your point [2:14:48] the exponential return [2:14:50] on whatever investment they give. [2:14:52] These are incredible [2:14:53] entrepreneurial leaders [2:14:55] at every Echelon [2:14:56] who do great, great things [2:14:59] as the lights dim [2:15:01] as I say that. [2:15:02] So hopefully they'll see [2:15:03] that as a nod towards them. [2:15:05] But I'll defer [2:15:06] on the budget allocation numbers [2:15:07] to the comptroller, sir. [2:15:11] First of all, [2:15:12] I want to second completely [2:15:14] your opening remarks [2:15:15] and that's certainly our view [2:15:16] as well. [2:15:18] On the SOCOM budget, [2:15:19] I'm going to say [2:15:20] I think we need to increase [2:15:22] what's in this budget [2:15:23] and I've heard [2:15:24] from multiple people [2:15:25] about that. [2:15:26] In fact, [2:15:26] that if there is a supplemental, [2:15:29] I actually just wrote [2:15:29] a note to Jay about it. [2:15:31] I think SOCOM, [2:15:32] given the op tempo, [2:15:33] given their direct participation [2:15:35] in so many of these [2:15:36] historic aspects, [2:15:38] SOCOM should be part [2:15:39] of that supplemental as well. [2:15:40] Makes complete sense. [2:15:41] Who's been shouldering [2:15:42] a huge part of the burden? [2:15:44] Special Operations Command. [2:15:45] So whether it's a supplemental [2:15:46] or this budget, [2:15:47] I fully agree [2:15:48] and I think we need [2:15:49] to invest more. [2:15:52] Great. [2:15:52] And I'd ask that [2:15:53] particular care be given. [2:15:54] The era of beards and guns [2:15:56] and kicking indoors, [2:15:57] as much fun as that was [2:15:58] for all of us, [2:15:59] it's coming to a close [2:16:00] and we're going to be [2:16:01] going back to our roots [2:16:02] as specialized commandos, [2:16:05] whether it's undersea, [2:16:06] Arctic, [2:16:07] airborne operations [2:16:08] and as we all became [2:16:09] kind of one joint [2:16:10] soft force during GWAT, [2:16:13] quite frankly, [2:16:13] that was an easier problem [2:16:14] to resource for, [2:16:15] to budget for [2:16:16] and acquire for. [2:16:17] It's going to be [2:16:18] a lot harder now [2:16:18] when our operators [2:16:20] go back to their service corners [2:16:21] and needs platform-specific [2:16:23] technologies and training. [2:16:24] Submersibles aircraft [2:16:26] take years to acquire, [2:16:27] years to specify. [2:16:28] It's not just buying [2:16:29] more ARs and body armor [2:16:30] and ammo [2:16:30] and sending them down range. [2:16:31] So I think we have to [2:16:32] think about the SOCOM budget [2:16:34] a little different thing [2:16:34] than we have [2:16:35] for the last 25 years [2:16:36] and make sure [2:16:37] we're programming it [2:16:37] in a way that it's sustained [2:16:39] and is protected. [2:16:40] Thank you. [2:16:41] Thank you, [2:16:42] Senator Schmidt, [2:16:42] for that insightful exchange. [2:16:47] Senator Kelly. [2:16:48] Thank you, [2:16:48] Mr. Chairman. [2:16:49] Gentlemen, [2:16:50] thank you for being here. [2:16:51] Secretary Hegseth, [2:16:52] it's safe to say [2:16:53] that our weapons [2:16:54] like SM-3s, [2:16:55] Tomahawks, [2:16:56] Patriot missiles [2:16:57] have capabilities [2:16:58] that are unmatched. [2:17:00] That's why they cost a lot, [2:17:01] take a long time to produce. [2:17:03] Your budget requests [2:17:04] $31.8 billion [2:17:06] to expand production capacity [2:17:09] for critical missile stockpiles. [2:17:11] Is that correct? [2:17:13] $31.8? [2:17:15] I'm looking at $53 billion [2:17:17] for munitions acceleration [2:17:19] over 14 critical munitions [2:17:21] of which the ones [2:17:21] you listed are a part. [2:17:23] So I believe more than that. [2:17:24] Yes, sir. [2:17:25] More than $20 billion more. [2:17:27] So we've been working together [2:17:29] to grow the industrial base [2:17:31] because we're all worried [2:17:32] about how our stockpiles [2:17:34] would hold up [2:17:35] in a conflict against China. [2:17:37] Since the start of this war, [2:17:38] you've made it a point [2:17:40] to highlight the number of strikes [2:17:42] the U.S. military [2:17:44] is carrying out, [2:17:45] citing that more than 13,000 targets [2:17:48] had been struck [2:17:49] as of April 8th. [2:17:51] On March 2nd, [2:17:52] you said, [2:17:53] and this is a quote, [2:17:53] this was a massive, [2:17:54] overwhelming attack [2:17:55] across all domains of warfare, [2:17:58] striking more than 1,000 targets [2:18:00] in the first 24 hours. [2:18:01] On March 10th, [2:18:02] you said, [2:18:03] yet again, [2:18:04] our most intense day of strikes [2:18:05] inside of Iran. [2:18:07] On April 6th, [2:18:08] you said, [2:18:09] and this is another quote, [2:18:10] the largest volume of strikes [2:18:12] since day one of this operation. [2:18:15] Your department has released video [2:18:17] after video of things blowing up. [2:18:19] None of us doubt the strength [2:18:22] of the U.S. military [2:18:23] and their ability [2:18:24] to do hard things. [2:18:25] I understand that [2:18:26] better than anybody. [2:18:28] The questions we should be asking [2:18:30] and answering are, [2:18:32] what does this cost us [2:18:34] and what does it achieve [2:18:36] for the American people? [2:18:38] Many of these strikes [2:18:39] use our best weapons, [2:18:42] and we're using a lot of them [2:18:43] and a lot of interceptors. [2:18:46] Open source reporting [2:18:47] has estimated that the military [2:18:48] has used an outrageous number [2:18:50] of patriots. [2:18:51] I'm not even going to say [2:18:52] the numbers, [2:18:52] but a lot of patriots, [2:18:53] a lot of Thad Rounds, [2:18:55] Jazmere, Tomahawks, [2:18:57] very expensive, exquisite. [2:18:59] We can't make these munitions [2:19:02] overnight, [2:19:02] and it's clear [2:19:03] from your budget request [2:19:05] that you know that. [2:19:07] Can you tell us [2:19:08] how many years, [2:19:11] specifically, [2:19:12] is it going to take [2:19:13] to replace these systems? [2:19:17] Senator, [2:19:18] thank you for the question. [2:19:18] I would defer [2:19:20] to the comptroller [2:19:20] on the amount [2:19:21] because I think [2:19:21] it's a lot higher than 53. [2:19:22] If you look at [2:19:23] long-range fires, [2:19:25] Jazmere, [2:19:25] Alrasmere, Tomahawks, [2:19:26] we're looking at 238 million. [2:19:28] We're looking at 40 billion [2:19:29] for hypersonic, [2:19:30] so I actually think [2:19:30] it's closer to 330 billion [2:19:32] in munitions. [2:19:33] Okay, how many years [2:19:34] to replenish? [2:19:35] That's the question. [2:19:36] I think that's exactly [2:19:37] the right question, too, [2:19:38] Senator, [2:19:38] because the time frame [2:19:40] we were existing under [2:19:41] was unacceptable. [2:19:42] Okay, well, tell me. [2:19:43] And what this budget does, [2:19:43] I mean, months and years. [2:19:45] Fast. [2:19:45] Years. [2:19:46] I mean, we're building [2:19:46] new plants in real time. [2:19:48] So just to replace [2:19:49] what we have expended. [2:19:51] I said months. [2:19:52] And then you said years. [2:19:53] It depends on the [2:19:54] weapons system. [2:19:55] But 2 to 3, 4x [2:19:57] of what we have today. [2:19:58] So yes, we're dealing [2:19:58] with the reality [2:19:59] under the previous [2:20:00] administration of what [2:20:01] they sent to Ukraine [2:20:01] and what they allocated [2:20:02] elsewhere. [2:20:03] Okay, I got it. [2:20:04] So we fired years [2:20:05] years worth of munitions. [2:20:08] And it is clear [2:20:10] that these are being [2:20:11] expended to try to achieve [2:20:15] some objectives. [2:20:17] That was the plan. [2:20:17] But, Mr. Secretary, [2:20:20] this war is stuck. [2:20:22] The Strait of Hormuz [2:20:23] is closed. [2:20:25] The Iranian regime [2:20:26] is in place. [2:20:28] The nuclear material [2:20:29] still in their hands. [2:20:32] Americans are being crushed [2:20:34] by higher costs. [2:20:37] And it's not clear [2:20:37] to them at all [2:20:40] what the goal [2:20:41] of this war is. [2:20:44] So, I've got about a minute. [2:20:48] And I want to go [2:20:49] to another topic. [2:20:51] I saw your hearing yesterday. [2:20:54] And I'm going to give you [2:20:54] one more chance [2:20:55] to address a question here. [2:20:59] It's my understanding [2:21:00] that the definition [2:21:02] of no quarter [2:21:03] is [2:21:04] that legitimate [2:21:06] offers of surrender [2:21:08] will be refused [2:21:09] or that detainees [2:21:12] will be executed. [2:21:14] Is that your understanding [2:21:16] of the definition? [2:21:19] The only entity [2:21:20] that would kill detainees [2:21:22] or target civilians [2:21:22] is the Iranians. [2:21:23] And they're the ones [2:21:24] being crushed. [2:21:25] It's the Iranian military [2:21:27] and their military capabilities. [2:21:28] The question is, [2:21:29] I disagree completely [2:21:30] with your articulation. [2:21:31] No, do you understand [2:21:32] the definition [2:21:33] that I just read you? [2:21:34] Because that's the definition [2:21:35] from your department's [2:21:37] law of war manual. [2:21:39] Is that your understanding? [2:21:41] And I'm going to just [2:21:42] get to the point here. [2:21:43] We fight to win [2:21:44] and we follow the law, Senator. [2:21:45] Okay, so, [2:21:46] your quote was, [2:21:48] we will keep pushing, [2:21:50] keep advancing, [2:21:51] no quarter, [2:21:52] no mercy for our enemies. [2:21:54] And yesterday, [2:21:55] you did not clarify [2:21:56] whether you stand [2:21:57] by this statement. [2:21:58] So, I'm going to give you [2:21:59] another opportunity [2:22:00] to clarify [2:22:01] if that is what you meant. [2:22:05] Do you stand [2:22:05] by that statement [2:22:06] you made on March 13th? [2:22:10] We have untied the hands [2:22:11] of our warfighters. [2:22:13] We fight to win [2:22:14] and we follow the law. [2:22:15] Okay, so, [2:22:16] you're not clarifying. [2:22:17] So, you stand [2:22:17] by that statement. [2:22:18] So, you're the Secretary [2:22:19] of Defense. [2:22:20] The things you say matter [2:22:22] and your response here [2:22:24] right now makes it clear [2:22:27] to the American people [2:22:28] exactly why you are not [2:22:31] right for this job. [2:22:32] It makes it clear [2:22:32] to our enemies, Senator. [2:22:34] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [2:22:35] Thank you. [2:22:40] Senator Sheehy [2:22:40] has left the room [2:22:42] but it's been whispered [2:22:44] to me that I just referred [2:22:45] to him in the last exchange [2:22:47] as Senator Schmidt. [2:22:49] I don't know [2:22:49] if he considered [2:22:50] that a compliment [2:22:51] or an insult [2:22:52] but I do correct that [2:22:54] for the record. [2:22:55] Senator Slotkin, [2:22:56] I think you are next. [2:22:57] Thank you. [2:22:59] Gentlemen, [2:23:00] you're here [2:23:01] to ask for $1.5 trillion, [2:23:04] 40% more [2:23:05] than what we gave you [2:23:07] last year, [2:23:08] a trillion dollars. [2:23:10] And I agree [2:23:11] with the chairman [2:23:12] of this committee [2:23:12] that the world [2:23:14] has never been more dangerous [2:23:15] and complicated [2:23:16] and regardless [2:23:18] of whether we disagree [2:23:21] on the reasons [2:23:21] for getting into this war, [2:23:23] I think we can all agree [2:23:24] that we want our military [2:23:26] to come out of it [2:23:27] safely and successfully [2:23:29] and as soon as feasible [2:23:31] the military [2:23:33] has taken, [2:23:34] you all, [2:23:35] the administration [2:23:35] has taken military action [2:23:37] in 10 different places [2:23:39] in the world [2:23:39] in 15 months, [2:23:41] more than any president [2:23:42] in U.S. history. [2:23:44] I think President Trump [2:23:46] has really become [2:23:47] a foreign policy president [2:23:48] and many of those operations, [2:23:51] you know, [2:23:51] were on the news [2:23:51] for a couple of days [2:23:52] but then the American public [2:23:53] didn't feel them [2:23:54] and I think the difference [2:23:55] with this war [2:23:56] with Iran [2:23:57] is that the American public [2:23:59] is feeling it [2:24:00] in their pocketbooks. [2:24:02] Gas in Michigan [2:24:03] is $4.99 today, [2:24:05] the cost of fertilizer, [2:24:06] of airline tickets, [2:24:07] things that are real [2:24:08] to people. [2:24:10] Secretary Haig said, [2:24:12] the president said [2:24:13] that you were most keen [2:24:14] on this war. [2:24:16] He said that you were [2:24:17] the most gung-ho about it [2:24:19] and I think despite [2:24:23] us all wanting [2:24:24] to come out [2:24:25] of this successfully, [2:24:26] it is hard to miss [2:24:27] that we are at the stalemate, [2:24:29] that we don't control [2:24:30] the Strait of Hormuz [2:24:32] because shipping [2:24:33] is not getting through [2:24:34] and we can block [2:24:36] what they're trying [2:24:37] to get through [2:24:37] but nothing is moving [2:24:39] and it's costing [2:24:40] the American public [2:24:41] and I think that's [2:24:42] a fundamentally different [2:24:44] moment than the rest [2:24:45] of the military action [2:24:46] we've taken. [2:24:48] Even in like [2:24:49] Middle East 101 class [2:24:51] we used to talk about [2:24:52] and run war games [2:24:53] on the Strait of Hormuz. [2:24:54] It's a strategic geography [2:24:55] that the Iranians have [2:24:57] and I think it's just [2:24:59] concerning to me [2:25:01] that we can try [2:25:03] and tell the American people [2:25:04] that it's going great [2:25:06] and we're killing it [2:25:06] but until the Strait of Hormuz [2:25:08] is open, [2:25:09] I don't think we can credibly [2:25:10] say that with any seriousness. [2:25:13] I think the question [2:25:15] I have for you though [2:25:16] is future looking [2:25:17] and it's our 2026 elections. [2:25:21] The President has been [2:25:22] very clear, [2:25:23] he said in the State of the Union [2:25:24] that essentially [2:25:25] if his side doesn't win [2:25:26] then the election was rigged. [2:25:28] He said that before [2:25:29] the 2020 election. [2:25:31] He's asked for voter rolls [2:25:32] for 29 different states. [2:25:35] He just asked for Detroit's votes [2:25:36] or ballots [2:25:38] and we know that in 2020 [2:25:41] he wrote an executive order [2:25:43] that he didn't sign [2:25:44] that said to the U.S. military, [2:25:47] to the Secretary of Defense, [2:25:49] you should go and seize ballots [2:25:51] and voting machines. [2:25:54] A few months ago, [2:25:54] he said that he regretted [2:25:55] that he ever, [2:25:56] that he didn't sign [2:25:57] that executive order. [2:26:00] So the U.S. military [2:26:01] has never been deployed. [2:26:03] You incorrectly said yesterday [2:26:06] that they were deployed [2:26:07] during different elections. [2:26:08] Governors deployed them [2:26:10] under their authorities, [2:26:11] but the federal government [2:26:13] has never put [2:26:15] the uniformed military [2:26:16] at our polls [2:26:17] during World War II, [2:26:18] right after 9-11. [2:26:20] We've never had to do that. [2:26:22] So Secretary Hegseth, [2:26:24] if the President, [2:26:25] who regrets not signing [2:26:26] that executive order [2:26:27] to the then-Sec Def in 2020, [2:26:29] asks you [2:26:29] to seize ballots [2:26:31] ballots or voting machines [2:26:33] in states during [2:26:35] the 2026 election, [2:26:37] will you stand up [2:26:38] for the Constitution [2:26:38] and say no, [2:26:39] or will you salute [2:26:41] and do his bidding? [2:26:44] Senator, [2:26:45] I didn't get a chance [2:26:46] to answer the front part [2:26:47] of your question, [2:26:47] which, you know, [2:26:48] there was a lot of [2:26:49] deferred maintenance [2:26:49] under the Biden administration [2:26:50] that needed to be addressed [2:26:52] because the world [2:26:52] was in chaos [2:26:53] when President Trump [2:26:54] was elected because of- [2:26:55] Please. [2:26:56] Well, again, [2:26:57] that's another- [2:26:57] It's the most important thing. [2:26:58] It's what's happening. [2:26:59] It's yet another [2:27:00] gotcha hypothetical, [2:27:01] which is your specialty. [2:27:03] It's not that we had [2:27:04] an executive order [2:27:05] that your predecessor [2:27:06] had to hold. [2:27:08] It's not a hypothetical. [2:27:09] I refuse to accept. [2:27:10] You give that answer [2:27:11] all the time. [2:27:12] You and I have done [2:27:12] this dance before. [2:27:13] Get over it, okay? [2:27:15] In 2020, [2:27:16] he's the president, [2:27:17] your boss, [2:27:18] the guy you're performing [2:27:19] for right now, [2:27:20] told the journalists [2:27:21] this year [2:27:22] that he wished [2:27:23] he signed that executive order [2:27:24] to your predecessor [2:27:26] and your predecessor [2:27:27] said publicly, [2:27:28] thank God, [2:27:29] we didn't actually [2:27:29] go forward with it. [2:27:30] What are you going to do? [2:27:31] You're the guy [2:27:32] here in the seat. [2:27:33] It's not hypothetical. [2:27:35] Tell the American people, [2:27:36] will you deploy [2:27:37] the uniform military [2:27:38] to our polls [2:27:40] to collect voter rolls [2:27:41] or machines? [2:27:42] Are you accusing me [2:27:43] of performing [2:27:44] because you're performing [2:27:44] for cable news right now? [2:27:46] Dude, dude, [2:27:46] just answer the question. [2:27:48] But Mr. Secretary, [2:27:48] we have- [2:27:48] It's a hypothetical. [2:27:50] By the way, [2:27:50] in 2024, [2:27:51] under the Biden administration, [2:27:52] 15 states did deploy [2:27:53] troops to poll stations. [2:27:53] Under their governor's authority, [2:27:55] when their governors asked for it- [2:27:56] What did Joe Biden say about that? [2:27:57] That's fundamentally- [2:27:58] I don't think anything [2:27:59] because he needed them [2:28:00] for cyber security [2:28:01] and for COVID. [2:28:02] Trump did it too, [2:28:03] under Trump. [2:28:04] But it was not [2:28:05] the federal decision. [2:28:06] It was those governors [2:28:07] of the states [2:28:08] under their authorities. [2:28:09] Okay? [2:28:10] It's never been done [2:28:11] in our history. [2:28:12] Please stand up [2:28:13] for the Constitution. [2:28:14] Do not send uniform military [2:28:16] to our polls. [2:28:18] Do you have a response [2:28:19] to that portion [2:28:20] of the question, [2:28:21] Mr. Secretary? [2:28:22] I've never been ordered [2:28:24] to do anything illegal, [2:28:25] and I won't. [2:28:26] That goes without saying. [2:28:28] Thank you for the answer. [2:28:29] Senator Duckworth, [2:28:30] you're now recognized. [2:28:31] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [2:28:34] Despite his campaign promise [2:28:35] of no new wars, [2:28:36] President Trump [2:28:37] has been obsessed [2:28:38] with using the military [2:28:38] any chance he gets, [2:28:40] from deploying troops [2:28:41] to American cities, [2:28:42] to propping up Maduro's [2:28:43] chosen number two [2:28:44] in Venezuela, [2:28:45] to an endless war [2:28:46] of boat strikes [2:28:47] in the Caribbean Sea, [2:28:48] and now in an illegal war [2:28:50] with Iran, [2:28:51] where hundreds of thousands [2:28:52] of our troops [2:28:52] are in harm's way every day [2:28:53] with no exit strategy [2:28:55] in sight. [2:28:55] This administration hides [2:28:57] bad policy behind [2:28:59] the exceptional military operations [2:29:00] and the valor [2:29:02] of our uniformed personnel. [2:29:04] I've long said Iran [2:29:05] is a malign actor, [2:29:06] but the responsible administration [2:29:07] would have managed [2:29:08] this short of conflict [2:29:09] instead of starting [2:29:11] a war of choice. [2:29:12] There was no imminent threat [2:29:13] to the United States [2:29:14] or our troops. [2:29:15] The military was not [2:29:16] the most effective tool [2:29:17] to get Iran to capitulate, [2:29:18] as we're already seeing [2:29:19] too clearly now. [2:29:21] And using forces [2:29:22] made Americans [2:29:23] in the Middle East [2:29:24] less safe [2:29:25] or spiking costs [2:29:25] for Americans [2:29:26] here at home [2:29:27] all through the tune [2:29:28] of 14 service members' [2:29:29] dead, hundreds wounded, [2:29:30] billions of taxpayer dollars [2:29:31] and untold costs [2:29:32] to our military readiness. [2:29:34] This administration [2:29:35] claims to be focused [2:29:36] on the warfighter, [2:29:37] but President Trump [2:29:38] told us [2:29:38] when he announced a war [2:29:39] from his luxury resort [2:29:40] that he expected [2:29:42] service members to die. [2:29:43] Now, sadly, [2:29:44] it's clear how unserious [2:29:46] Trump is about his role [2:29:47] as the commander-in-chief. [2:29:49] His war within Iran [2:29:50] has already reminded us [2:29:51] how important it is [2:29:52] to prevent a war, [2:29:54] how serious it is [2:29:55] to ask the military [2:29:55] to wage one [2:29:56] under poor strategic direction, [2:29:58] how destructive [2:29:59] a wide-ranging war [2:30:00] can be for Americans, [2:30:01] for our service members, [2:30:02] and how difficult it is [2:30:03] to actually end one [2:30:05] once you start it. [2:30:06] The incompetence [2:30:07] and casual disregard [2:30:09] for our service members' [2:30:09] professionalism [2:30:10] and sacrifice [2:30:11] is, in my opinion, [2:30:13] a scandal. [2:30:14] General Cain, [2:30:16] General Cain, [2:30:17] can you tell us [2:30:18] the status [2:30:19] of the Iranian [2:30:19] Revolutionary Guard Corps' [2:30:21] Navy, [2:30:22] the entity actively [2:30:22] closing the strait? [2:30:26] They're, [2:30:26] Senator, [2:30:27] apologies, [2:30:28] I was listening to you. [2:30:29] I was just trying [2:30:30] to write it down. [2:30:31] No worries. [2:30:31] They're mostly destroyed. [2:30:34] CENTCOM continues [2:30:35] to watch them. [2:30:37] Not the Iranian Navy? [2:30:39] No, no. [2:30:39] The IRCG? [2:30:40] Yes, ma'am. [2:30:41] The smaller, [2:30:42] I won't get into [2:30:42] any classified materials, [2:30:44] but the smaller, [2:30:45] fast, [2:30:47] and, you know, [2:30:48] smaller boats, [2:30:49] Boston Whaler-sized boats. [2:30:50] There's still some [2:30:51] out there. [2:30:52] Yes, ma'am. [2:30:52] So this administration [2:30:53] and the Secretary of Defense [2:30:55] has been boasting [2:30:56] about sinking the ships [2:30:56] of the Iranian Navy, [2:30:58] but let's call this [2:30:58] what it is. [2:30:59] It's misdirection. [2:31:00] They want us to focus [2:31:01] on the impressive number [2:31:02] of large Iranian ships [2:31:03] underwater [2:31:04] to distract from the fact [2:31:05] that they had no plans [2:31:06] for the second Navy [2:31:07] that Iran owns [2:31:08] that has always been [2:31:09] a hard problem [2:31:09] to address [2:31:10] by military force. [2:31:11] The IRCG Navy, [2:31:12] not the Iranian Navy, [2:31:14] has been Iran's tip [2:31:15] of the spear [2:31:15] at the Straits of Hormuz, [2:31:16] seizing vessels [2:31:17] and threatening [2:31:18] to target [2:31:18] U.S. assets. [2:31:20] Iran has long invested [2:31:21] in this second [2:31:22] asymmetrical Navy, [2:31:24] specifically [2:31:24] to develop capabilities [2:31:25] that would be difficult [2:31:26] for conventional [2:31:27] U.S. military forces [2:31:28] to target. [2:31:29] Iran's advantage [2:31:30] was well-known [2:31:31] to anyone paying attention. [2:31:32] I have no doubt [2:31:33] that competent planners [2:31:34] in the Pentagon [2:31:34] raised their concerns [2:31:36] about a quagmire [2:31:36] in the strait [2:31:37] to leadership. [2:31:38] The question is, [2:31:39] why their leadership [2:31:39] did not pay attention [2:31:40] to this sound advice? [2:31:42] Hubris is not strategy [2:31:43] and in war it costs lives. [2:31:45] Even if the strait reopens, [2:31:46] this administration [2:31:47] has created [2:31:48] a new, [2:31:49] less safe world [2:31:49] by initiating [2:31:50] and then bungling [2:31:51] this crisis [2:31:51] and teaching Iran [2:31:52] that it can charge [2:31:53] a million dollars a ship [2:31:54] to transit the strait. [2:31:57] It will take a long time [2:31:58] for the global economy [2:31:58] to bounce back [2:31:59] to normal trade flows [2:32:00] and Iran has learned, [2:32:02] again, [2:32:02] that they can charge [2:32:02] a million dollars per ship, [2:32:03] creating a new funding line [2:32:05] for their malicious activity [2:32:06] against Americans [2:32:07] for years to come. [2:32:09] And in the Indo-Pacific, [2:32:11] I don't doubt [2:32:12] that if the worst day comes, [2:32:13] our military will step up [2:32:14] to challenge [2:32:14] and defend Americans [2:32:15] in our interest [2:32:16] with military force. [2:32:17] But will they be asked [2:32:18] to lay down their lives [2:32:18] unnecessarily just because [2:32:20] the White House [2:32:20] was unready [2:32:21] and incapable [2:32:21] of preventing a crisis [2:32:22] boiling over into a war [2:32:24] in the Indo-Pacific? [2:32:25] General Cain, [2:32:26] do you agree [2:32:26] that the military [2:32:27] would benefit [2:32:27] from significant [2:32:28] intra-agency planning [2:32:30] by the Department of Defense [2:32:31] on actions short of war [2:32:33] that can be taken [2:32:34] if a crisis occurs? [2:32:35] I appreciate that question. [2:32:38] You're highlighting [2:32:38] the importance of that. [2:32:40] And we have really [2:32:42] great relationships now [2:32:44] on the joint staff [2:32:45] with the interagency. [2:32:47] I think our relationship [2:32:48] in particular, [2:32:49] I'll just pick CIA, [2:32:50] I think it's the best [2:32:52] it's ever been. [2:32:53] We're really working hard [2:32:54] to find the best [2:32:55] of Title X capabilities [2:32:57] plus the best of Title 50 [2:32:59] to ensure that we deliver [2:33:00] really entrepreneurial options [2:33:03] for our national policymakers [2:33:05] to do what you're talking [2:33:06] about, Senator. [2:33:06] All right. [2:33:08] But I am concerned [2:33:09] because during the recent [2:33:10] NDS hearing, [2:33:11] I laid out the very real ways [2:33:12] that a crisis in just one [2:33:13] of the dozens of flashpoints [2:33:14] in the Indo-Pacific [2:33:15] could be devastating [2:33:16] for our service members, [2:33:17] Americans, [2:33:18] and our American economy. [2:33:20] But since then, [2:33:20] this administration [2:33:21] has only further diminished [2:33:22] DOD's ability [2:33:23] to prepare for these crises. [2:33:25] In fact, [2:33:25] as many as one-third [2:33:27] of the assets [2:33:27] in the Middle East [2:33:28] originally meant to be [2:33:30] in the Indo-Pacific. [2:33:31] This war of choice [2:33:32] is draining our military resources. [2:33:35] We need leaders [2:33:35] who do everything they can [2:33:36] to ensure warfighters [2:33:37] only fight when they have to, [2:33:38] not because of one man's whims [2:33:39] and the lack of bravery [2:33:40] among the yes-men [2:33:41] he surrounds himself with. [2:33:42] I thank you [2:33:43] for your service, General, [2:33:45] and I continue [2:33:46] to look forward [2:33:47] to working with you. [2:33:47] Thank you, Senator Duckworth. [2:33:49] Senator Rosen. [2:33:51] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [2:33:52] Thank you, [2:33:53] Ranking Member Reed. [2:33:54] Thank you, General, [2:33:56] for your service. [2:33:58] Before I begin, [2:33:59] my questions [2:34:00] for Secretary Hegsteth, [2:34:01] I have one brief, [2:34:02] important question [2:34:03] for General Kane. [2:34:04] General, [2:34:05] as you've acknowledged [2:34:06] at your confirmation hearing, [2:34:07] service members [2:34:08] who served at locations [2:34:09] which another U.S. government agency [2:34:11] deems contaminated, [2:34:13] like the Nevada Test [2:34:14] and Training Range, [2:34:15] should have the same presumption [2:34:17] of radiation exposure [2:34:19] as DOE employees [2:34:20] who served alongside them. [2:34:23] But we also must ensure [2:34:24] that DOD provides the VA [2:34:25] with the records proving [2:34:27] that these individuals [2:34:28] serve there. [2:34:29] So this is a problem [2:34:30] that DOD has the power [2:34:32] to solve. [2:34:33] I know we've discussed this. [2:34:35] So, General Kane, [2:34:35] will you commit [2:34:36] to ensuring parity [2:34:37] for DOD personnel [2:34:38] who served in locations [2:34:40] that the U.S. government [2:34:41] has already deemed contaminated, [2:34:43] identifying those [2:34:44] who served in such locations [2:34:45] and providing documentation [2:34:47] of that service [2:34:48] to the VA [2:34:48] so that they can receive [2:34:50] the veterans benefits [2:34:51] that they have earned? [2:34:54] You bet, ma'am. [2:34:55] And, you know, [2:34:56] since our last time [2:34:57] together on this, [2:34:58] we've continued [2:34:59] we've continued [2:34:59] to chip away [2:35:00] at removing [2:35:01] or figuring out [2:35:02] how to get past [2:35:02] that one particular blocking [2:35:05] in that record [2:35:06] so that that data flows [2:35:07] normally. [2:35:08] And I'm committed [2:35:09] to trying to solve that [2:35:11] for those leaders [2:35:12] and teammates [2:35:13] who are out there [2:35:14] at that site. [2:35:14] Thank you. [2:35:15] We'll look forward [2:35:15] to continue to work [2:35:16] with you on that. [2:35:17] So, Secretary Hegseth, [2:35:19] I want to talk [2:35:19] a little bit about AI [2:35:20] because, of course, [2:35:22] our service members [2:35:22] deserve every advantage [2:35:24] we can give them. [2:35:25] So, I just want you [2:35:26] to help me understand this. [2:35:27] In February, [2:35:28] on the eve [2:35:29] of Operation Epic Fury, [2:35:31] you publicly designated [2:35:32] Anthropic [2:35:33] as a supply chain risk. [2:35:35] However, this week, [2:35:36] it's been reported [2:35:37] that the White House [2:35:37] is now helping agencies [2:35:39] get around this decision [2:35:40] to access Anthropic's [2:35:42] technology. [2:35:43] So, the administration [2:35:44] cannot credibly make [2:35:46] both claims simultaneously. [2:35:48] So, before I ask you [2:35:50] about the inconsistency, [2:35:51] I just want you [2:35:52] to reconfirm [2:35:53] what it is you plan [2:35:54] to use this technology for. [2:35:57] It's been publicly reported [2:35:58] that the decision [2:35:59] to label Anthropic [2:36:00] a national security risk [2:36:01] was influenced [2:36:02] by your personal [2:36:03] and very public [2:36:04] contract dispute [2:36:05] with Anthropic [2:36:06] when the company said [2:36:07] that its technology [2:36:08] could not be used [2:36:09] for fully autonomous weapons [2:36:11] targeting [2:36:12] or mass surveillance [2:36:13] of Americans. [2:36:15] So, following up [2:36:16] on your response [2:36:16] to Senator Rounds earlier, [2:36:19] can you confirm [2:36:20] whether or not [2:36:21] there will always [2:36:22] be a human [2:36:23] in the loop [2:36:23] when AI is used [2:36:25] for lethal [2:36:25] targeting decisions? [2:36:29] Well, first of all, [2:36:30] on Anthropic, [2:36:30] they would not agree [2:36:31] to our terms of service. [2:36:32] That would be like [2:36:33] Boeing giving us airplanes [2:36:34] and telling us [2:36:35] who we can shoot at. [2:36:36] This is not just [2:36:37] about Anthropic, though. [2:36:38] I just want to be clear. [2:36:40] And also, [2:36:41] Anthropic is run [2:36:41] by an ideological lunatic [2:36:43] who shouldn't have a [2:36:44] sole decision-making [2:36:46] over what we do. [2:36:48] Writ large. [2:36:48] We follow the law, Senator. [2:36:50] Should AI... [2:36:50] Well, you confirm. [2:36:51] You said this [2:36:52] to Senator Rounds earlier, [2:36:53] so I'm just asking [2:36:54] for you to... [2:36:54] We follow the law, [2:36:55] but we don't have to sign [2:36:56] a different terms of agreement [2:36:57] with Anthropic. [2:36:59] This is not the question. [2:37:00] This is not about Anthropic. [2:37:01] This is just an example. [2:37:03] I want you to confirm [2:37:05] that whether or not [2:37:06] there will always be [2:37:07] a human in the loop [2:37:08] when AI is used [2:37:10] in the kill chain [2:37:10] for lethal targeting decisions. [2:37:12] Will there always be [2:37:13] a human in a loop, [2:37:14] or will AI make the decision? [2:37:16] You said this to... [2:37:17] We follow the law [2:37:19] and humans make decisions. [2:37:21] So you will confirm [2:37:25] what you said [2:37:25] to Senator Rounds, [2:37:26] that a human [2:37:27] will always be in the loop [2:37:28] when AI is used. [2:37:30] Which is why... [2:37:31] I'm just... [2:37:32] That's part of our [2:37:32] terms of service anyway. [2:37:34] You know... [2:37:36] It's how we operate. [2:37:38] All I want to say is this. [2:37:40] There is a DOD directive, [2:37:42] 3000.09, [2:37:46] which mandates [2:37:47] that autonomous [2:37:48] and semi-autonomous [2:37:49] weapon systems [2:37:50] be designed [2:37:51] to allow commanders [2:37:52] and operators [2:37:53] to exercise appropriate levels [2:37:55] of human judgment [2:37:56] over use of force. [2:37:57] That is in the DOD directive. [2:38:00] That's why we follow [2:38:00] the law, Senator. [2:38:01] So the answer is yes, [2:38:03] Mr. Secretary. [2:38:04] The answer is we follow [2:38:04] the law, absolutely. [2:38:06] I think this is more important [2:38:08] than following the law. [2:38:09] I think that people [2:38:10] want to know [2:38:11] that AI isn't going [2:38:12] to make lethal decisions [2:38:13] and it is critically important. [2:38:14] AI is not making [2:38:15] lethal decisions. [2:38:17] That's what we want to hear. [2:38:18] We're going to follow [2:38:19] on that one. [2:38:20] I have just a few seconds left. [2:38:24] But you keep doubling down [2:38:27] on this phrase, [2:38:29] Mr. Secretary. [2:38:30] You compare journalists, [2:38:32] you compare us, [2:38:33] you compare so many [2:38:34] to Pharisees. [2:38:37] Pharisees. [2:38:38] It's a problematic [2:38:38] and historically weaponized term [2:38:41] that cast Jewish communities [2:38:42] as hypocritical [2:38:43] or morally corrupt. [2:38:44] You doubled down again [2:38:46] and said it. [2:38:48] Words matter. [2:38:49] Words matter. [2:38:50] What you choose to say, [2:38:51] how we choose to say it. [2:38:53] How do you justify [2:38:54] using this language [2:38:55] as Secretary of Defense? [2:38:56] Words matter. [2:38:57] It's a hurt, [2:38:58] historically hurtful term. [2:39:01] Why do you continue [2:39:02] to use it [2:39:02] and what actions [2:39:03] are you taking [2:39:04] to prevent rhetoric [2:39:05] like this [2:39:06] from permeating [2:39:06] throughout the department [2:39:07] that is going to target [2:39:09] specific groups [2:39:10] or individuals [2:39:11] of people [2:39:12] based on their religion? [2:39:16] Senator, [2:39:17] I feel like [2:39:17] it's a pretty accurate term [2:39:19] for folks [2:39:20] who don't see the plank [2:39:20] in their own eye [2:39:21] and always want to see [2:39:22] what's wrong [2:39:23] with an operation [2:39:23] as opposed to [2:39:24] the historic success [2:39:25] of preventing Iran [2:39:26] from getting a nuclear weapon. [2:39:27] so I stand by it. [2:39:29] You stand by [2:39:29] calling people Pharisees. [2:39:31] Sir, [2:39:32] I cannot, [2:39:33] I cannot stand [2:39:35] for that. [2:39:36] That is wrong. [2:39:37] It is not respectful [2:39:38] to people [2:39:39] and I expect anyone [2:39:41] who is in leadership [2:39:42] in our country [2:39:44] to be respectful [2:39:46] and use respectful terms [2:39:49] and not be [2:39:50] an anti-Semite. [2:39:54] Thank you, [2:39:55] Senator Rosen. [2:39:57] The chair [2:39:58] and the ranking member [2:40:00] have no second round questions. [2:40:03] I'm told by Senator Kelly [2:40:05] that he would like [2:40:06] to ask a second question. [2:40:10] Yeah, Mr. Secretary, [2:40:11] so $1.5 trillion, [2:40:13] $1.5 is a very round number. [2:40:17] You know, [2:40:18] if you're putting together [2:40:18] a budget, [2:40:19] you'd come up with [2:40:20] these are the problems [2:40:21] we're trying to solve. [2:40:24] This is the capability [2:40:25] we need. [2:40:26] These are the systems [2:40:28] we have to buy. [2:40:30] And at the end of the day, [2:40:31] it would spit out a number [2:40:32] and it's probably not [2:40:33] $1.5 trillion. [2:40:34] So to me, [2:40:35] it feels like that number [2:40:36] was just kind of [2:40:37] pulled out of thin air. [2:40:39] I took a look recently [2:40:43] and it seems that [2:40:45] the defense budget [2:40:46] of the rest of the world, [2:40:49] I'm talking China, [2:40:51] Russia, India, [2:40:53] every Asian country, [2:40:54] every European country, [2:40:55] South America, [2:40:56] everybody else [2:40:57] is in the neighborhood. [2:40:59] It looked like 1.7 to 1.8. [2:41:02] So your request [2:41:04] is approaching [2:41:05] all defense spending [2:41:07] from everybody else [2:41:08] with the exception of us. [2:41:10] That is a huge amount of money. [2:41:13] You know, [2:41:13] when I got here, [2:41:14] you know, [2:41:14] just five years ago, [2:41:16] it was almost half [2:41:18] of that. [2:41:21] Through budget reconciliation, [2:41:22] you've received [2:41:23] a bunch of money [2:41:25] to buy things, [2:41:27] some of the weapons systems, [2:41:29] you know, [2:41:29] to resupply what we need. [2:41:31] I'm just trying to understand, [2:41:33] you know, [2:41:33] like where is all this money [2:41:35] going to go? [2:41:36] And if you've figured out [2:41:37] ahead of time, [2:41:38] what do you want [2:41:39] to spend this on? [2:41:40] And by the way, [2:41:42] there are systems [2:41:43] the president wants. [2:41:45] You know, [2:41:45] he saw last summer [2:41:48] how effective [2:41:48] Iron Dome [2:41:50] and David's Sling were. [2:41:51] And because of that, [2:41:54] the president decided [2:41:55] we're going to build [2:41:56] our own version. [2:41:58] We're going to call it [2:41:58] Golden Dome [2:41:59] because the president [2:42:01] likes the color gold. [2:42:03] We've seen that. [2:42:04] See it in the Oval Office. [2:42:06] We're going to call it [2:42:06] Golden Dome [2:42:07] and it might cost [2:42:08] somewhere between [2:42:09] $500 billion [2:42:09] and a trillion dollars. [2:42:11] I've heard those estimates. [2:42:12] By the way, [2:42:13] on that problem, [2:42:14] I know a little bit about [2:42:15] intercepting stuff [2:42:17] in space. [2:42:18] It's really hard. [2:42:19] And the physics on this [2:42:21] favors the offense. [2:42:22] There's some things [2:42:24] in that program [2:42:25] that I think [2:42:26] is really important [2:42:27] that we do [2:42:27] and try to figure it out. [2:42:30] But space-based interceptors [2:42:31] to hit multiple targets. [2:42:34] And by the way, [2:42:35] it's important [2:42:36] how you size the system. [2:42:38] So I'm trying to understand, [2:42:40] Mr. Secretary, [2:42:41] what kind of detail [2:42:42] did you guys... [2:42:44] Did you work out [2:42:45] like a detailed plan [2:42:46] and at the end of the day [2:42:47] it came out, [2:42:48] oh, it just happens [2:42:49] to come out [2:42:49] to be $1.5 trillion? [2:42:53] Senator, [2:42:54] the exact amount [2:42:54] is actually $1.535 trillion. [2:42:57] And it was a product [2:42:58] of a highly rigorous process [2:43:00] throughout our department, [2:43:02] from COCOM commanders [2:43:03] to the services [2:43:04] with our comptroller, [2:43:05] with our deputy secretary, [2:43:06] with the chairman [2:43:06] and myself, [2:43:07] to ensure the budget [2:43:08] reflects the realities [2:43:09] of the world we live in [2:43:10] and the capabilities [2:43:11] we're going to need. [2:43:11] And that's why [2:43:12] there's $65 billion [2:43:13] for shipbuilding, [2:43:14] $120 billion [2:43:15] for the defense industrial base, [2:43:17] $331 billion [2:43:18] for munitions, [2:43:20] $44 billion [2:43:20] for quality of life, [2:43:22] $71 billion [2:43:23] on our nuclear dib. [2:43:24] You name it, [2:43:25] we're investing in it. [2:43:26] And the biggest reason [2:43:27] for it is the underinvestment [2:43:28] of the Biden administration. [2:43:30] I mean, [2:43:30] what they spent on defense, [2:43:31] the continuing resolutions [2:43:33] and others, [2:43:34] undercut the buildup [2:43:35] that President Trump [2:43:36] had created. [2:43:36] So, yes, [2:43:37] we're doing a lot [2:43:38] of deferred maintenance here [2:43:39] around the world [2:43:40] and in our department. [2:43:41] And this budget reflects it. [2:43:43] And it's a commitment, [2:43:44] a generational commitment [2:43:45] to the security [2:43:45] of the American people. [2:43:46] And if the rest of the world [2:43:47] won't spend on their defense, [2:43:49] that's their fault. [2:43:50] The American Department of War [2:43:52] will invest properly [2:43:53] to defend the American people [2:43:54] and that's what this budget [2:43:55] stands for. [2:43:55] I've always been supportive [2:43:56] of defense spending [2:43:58] in my entire time here. [2:44:00] And after 25 years [2:44:01] in the Navy, [2:44:02] I want to make sure [2:44:03] our folks have [2:44:04] what they need. [2:44:06] I think you should go back [2:44:07] and take a look [2:44:08] and see if there are places [2:44:10] where we are making investments [2:44:12] that we actually don't need. [2:44:13] There are some systems [2:44:14] out there. [2:44:15] I mean, [2:44:15] we're constantly looking [2:44:16] and trying to balance, [2:44:18] do we want F-47, [2:44:20] which I've been supportive of, [2:44:22] B-21, also supportive. [2:44:25] And then we want to make [2:44:27] all these other investments [2:44:28] in really inexpensive, [2:44:31] low-cost munitions [2:44:33] because we suddenly realize [2:44:36] that the expensive stuff, [2:44:37] even through B-21, [2:44:39] we can't really maybe [2:44:40] not get close enough. [2:44:41] But the whole idea [2:44:42] behind B-21 and F-47 [2:44:44] is we can penetrate further [2:44:45] into the A-2-AD bubble. [2:44:47] So there's some conflict there. [2:44:50] So I'm just encouraging you [2:44:52] to go back and see [2:44:53] if there are some systems [2:44:56] where we can bring that number, [2:44:58] the overall number, down. [2:45:00] Because as I look at what [2:45:01] the department is trying to field, [2:45:04] some of this stuff, [2:45:06] in my judgment, [2:45:07] and I know others [2:45:09] might have another opinion, [2:45:10] some of this stuff [2:45:11] we either don't need [2:45:12] or it's not going to work. [2:45:14] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [2:45:15] Senator Kelly, [2:45:16] your time has expired. [2:45:17] Let me just say [2:45:17] you have a great deal [2:45:19] of expertise [2:45:19] in the area of space [2:45:21] and we do look forward [2:45:23] to your contribution [2:45:25] as we mark up [2:45:26] further legislation. [2:45:29] Senator Blumenthal, [2:45:29] I understand you have [2:45:30] a follow-up question. [2:45:33] Yes. [2:45:34] First of all, [2:45:35] I want to thank you, [2:45:38] Mr. Secretary, [2:45:39] for your support [2:45:40] for the Major Richard Starr Act, [2:45:42] which I think [2:45:43] is tremendously significant. [2:45:46] I'm committed [2:45:47] to getting it done [2:45:48] as soon as possible, [2:45:49] at least before Veterans Day, [2:45:52] and I look forward [2:45:54] to your help [2:45:54] in accomplishing that goal, [2:45:56] but I want to thank you [2:45:57] for your support. [2:45:59] I'm sure the Veterans of America [2:46:00] are grateful [2:46:02] for the prospective victory there. [2:46:06] I've talked to [2:46:09] many of the combatant commanders [2:46:11] about lessons learned [2:46:13] from Ukraine, [2:46:16] and I think that [2:46:19] there is unanimity [2:46:21] on the point [2:46:22] that there is a lot [2:46:23] to be learned, [2:46:26] not only about [2:46:27] what the Russians are doing, [2:46:28] but what other adversaries [2:46:30] could do as well. [2:46:31] General Kaine, [2:46:33] Chairman Kaine, [2:46:33] would you agree [2:46:35] that there are lessons [2:46:36] to be learned [2:46:37] from Ukraine? [2:46:40] You bet, [2:46:40] you bet, Senator, [2:46:41] and there's lessons learned [2:46:43] from everywhere, [2:46:43] and that's really the culture [2:46:44] of our joint force right now [2:46:46] is to make sure [2:46:47] that across the globe, [2:46:48] anytime we're in contact [2:46:50] with the enemy, [2:46:51] we're going back [2:46:51] and determining [2:46:52] what we can learn [2:46:53] from there, [2:46:54] but a big one, [2:46:56] if you'll allow me, [2:46:57] a big one is mass [2:47:00] and simultaneity, [2:47:03] which is something [2:47:03] the Secretary's [2:47:04] taking a strong role [2:47:06] in making sure [2:47:07] that we're doing that [2:47:08] through drone evaluations [2:47:09] and things like that [2:47:11] moving forward. [2:47:14] Following up on a question [2:47:15] that I asked earlier [2:47:16] in my last question, [2:47:18] the President said yesterday [2:47:20] that his view is, [2:47:22] after his conversation [2:47:23] with Vladimir Putin, [2:47:25] that Ukraine has been, [2:47:27] quote, [2:47:28] militarily defeated. [2:47:30] In your professional judgment, [2:47:34] has Ukraine been [2:47:35] militarily defeated? [2:47:36] Sir, [2:47:37] I haven't seen [2:47:38] the President's quote, [2:47:39] but, you know, [2:47:40] I'll go back [2:47:41] to something [2:47:41] I started with, [2:47:42] and that's the importance [2:47:44] of importance [2:47:45] of me maintaining trust [2:47:48] with a variety of people. [2:47:50] And, you know, [2:47:51] a President will make [2:47:53] a wide range [2:47:54] of comments [2:47:55] and considerations [2:47:56] as the Commander-in-Chief. [2:47:57] You don't have to go [2:47:58] too much farther. [2:47:59] I understand the point [2:48:00] that you're making. [2:48:00] Thank you. [2:48:01] I appreciate it, Senator. [2:48:02] In my view, [2:48:05] Ukraine has not only [2:48:06] not been militarily defeated, [2:48:08] but the point [2:48:09] that I was trying to make [2:48:10] in the last exchange [2:48:11] with the Secretary, [2:48:14] there's a false narrative [2:48:15] based on my last visit [2:48:18] to Ukraine, [2:48:19] which was my ninth, [2:48:20] my conversation [2:48:21] not only with [2:48:22] President Zelensky, [2:48:24] but with our own military [2:48:27] on the ground, [2:48:29] as well as [2:48:29] our intelligence community. [2:48:31] In fact, [2:48:34] Ukraine arguably is winning. [2:48:35] There is this false narrative. [2:48:37] Russia is winning. [2:48:38] Putin wants [2:48:38] that false narrative [2:48:39] to be our official narrative. [2:48:41] I'm not putting words [2:48:42] in your mouth. [2:48:44] And you don't have to respond. [2:48:45] I understand [2:48:45] your reasons [2:48:46] for not responding. [2:48:47] But the American people [2:48:48] should know [2:48:49] that the President [2:48:51] of the United States [2:48:52] is undermining [2:48:53] our security [2:48:54] because Ukraine [2:48:56] is holding the line [2:48:58] against Vladimir Putin, [2:48:59] who will keep going [2:49:01] against Moldova, [2:49:03] which I also visited [2:49:04] on my last trip, [2:49:06] against our nation [2:49:07] NATO allies. [2:49:08] And we still have [2:49:09] an obligation [2:49:10] under Article 5 [2:49:11] to come to their defense, [2:49:14] just as they did [2:49:16] after 9-11, [2:49:18] as King Charles [2:49:19] so eloquently [2:49:21] reminded us. [2:49:23] And my view is, [2:49:25] and this observation [2:49:26] is hardly novel, [2:49:28] that China is watching [2:49:29] what we're doing [2:49:30] in Ukraine. [2:49:31] Would you agree? [2:49:31] Sir, I'd agree that [2:49:34] China's watching [2:49:35] everywhere [2:49:36] and carefully thinking [2:49:39] about what their [2:49:40] force posture [2:49:41] and approach will be. [2:49:42] And I think [2:49:43] they're learning [2:49:45] a variety of things [2:49:46] to include [2:49:47] the tenacity [2:49:48] and grit [2:49:48] of the joint force [2:49:49] around the things [2:49:50] that we've been [2:49:51] ordered to do [2:49:52] over the last year. [2:49:53] But if they see [2:49:55] weakness in our [2:49:56] response to Russia [2:49:57] and Ukraine, [2:49:58] that will affect [2:50:00] the deterrence [2:50:02] of their possibly [2:50:03] moving against [2:50:06] one of our allies [2:50:08] or partners [2:50:09] in the Far East. [2:50:11] Let me finally [2:50:12] ask Mr. Hurst, [2:50:14] your estimate [2:50:15] of $25 billion, [2:50:17] would you share [2:50:17] with us [2:50:18] what that estimate [2:50:20] is based on? [2:50:23] Yeah, [2:50:23] we can work [2:50:24] to get you a product, [2:50:25] the details, [2:50:25] if you'd like. [2:50:27] And finally, [2:50:28] Mr. Secretary, [2:50:29] is there going [2:50:30] to be a report [2:50:30] on the bombing [2:50:33] of the school [2:50:34] in the first day [2:50:35] or so of the war? [2:50:36] I know you were [2:50:37] asked about it yesterday. [2:50:39] I'm wondering [2:50:39] whether you have [2:50:40] a more detailed [2:50:42] response [2:50:43] that you can share [2:50:44] with us. [2:50:45] As I've said, [2:50:45] that's under [2:50:46] investigation of 15-6. [2:50:47] A general officer [2:50:48] from outside [2:50:49] the chain of command [2:50:49] has been reviewing it [2:50:50] and it's still [2:50:52] within the parameters [2:50:53] of the investigation. [2:50:54] Will there be [2:50:54] a preliminary report [2:50:56] in the next few weeks [2:50:59] or do you have [2:50:59] a time estimate? [2:51:02] I don't have [2:51:02] a time estimate [2:51:03] for you, [2:51:03] but it will be, [2:51:05] it's right now [2:51:06] within the parameters [2:51:07] of the length of time [2:51:08] that normally [2:51:08] these investigations take. [2:51:10] I'm asking [2:51:10] because in your [2:51:11] final response [2:51:13] to Senator Gillibrand, [2:51:15] you said [2:51:16] that great care [2:51:18] is taken [2:51:19] to avoid [2:51:19] civilian casualties [2:51:21] and it would be [2:51:22] profoundly significant [2:51:24] if that report [2:51:25] were made available [2:51:25] in a timely way [2:51:27] to show, [2:51:27] in fact, [2:51:28] the commitment [2:51:29] to avoiding [2:51:30] civilian casualties [2:51:31] and learning lessons [2:51:32] from the mistake [2:51:34] made there. [2:51:35] Thank you, [2:51:36] Senator Blumenthal. [2:51:37] This concludes [2:51:38] today's hearing. [2:51:39] I'd like to thank [2:51:40] our witnesses [2:51:40] for their testimony. [2:51:42] For the information [2:51:42] of members, [2:51:43] questions for the record [2:51:44] would be due [2:51:45] to the committee [2:51:46] within two business days [2:51:47] of the conclusion [2:51:48] of the hearing. [2:51:49] We are adjourned. [2:51:50] And wrapping up [2:52:23] here on Capitol Hill, [2:52:24] Defense Secretary [2:52:25] Pete Hegseth [2:52:26] and Joint Chiefs [2:52:26] of Staff Chair [2:52:27] General Dan Kane [2:52:28] testifying on [2:52:29] the Pentagon's [2:52:30] budget priorities [2:52:31] and the conflict [2:52:32] with Iran. [2:52:32] If you missed [2:52:33] any of our live coverage, [2:52:35] you can watch it [2:52:35] in full tonight [2:52:36] at 9 Eastern [2:52:37] on C-SPAN. [2:52:39] It's also available [2:52:40] online at c-span.org. [2:52:49] C-SPAN 3, [2:52:51] democracy unfiltered. [2:52:56] America celebrates [2:52:57] 250 years [2:52:58] and C-SPAN is there [2:53:00] to mark every moment [2:53:01] from the signing [2:53:02] of the Declaration [2:53:03] of Independence [2:53:04] to the voices [2:53:05] shaping our nation's future [2:53:06] from famous speeches [2:53:08] Give me death! [2:53:12] to battle reenactments [2:53:13] and visits to key [2:53:16] historic sites [2:53:17] across the country [2:53:18] We bring you [2:53:19] unprecedented [2:53:19] all-platform coverage [2:53:21] exploring the stories, [2:53:23] sites, [2:53:24] and spirit [2:53:24] that make up America. [2:53:26] Join us for [2:53:27] remarkable [2:53:28] coast-to-coast coverage [2:53:29] featuring key events [2:53:30] from our past [2:53:31] that make possible [2:53:32] the unlimited opportunities [2:53:34] of our future. [2:53:35] C-SPAN 3, [2:53:37] c-SPAN 4, [2:53:38] a-bred [2:53:40] o-t... [2:53:40] a-bred [2:53:41] o-t... [2:53:41] o-t... [2:53:42] A-bred [2:53:43] o-t... [2:53:43] o-f... [2:53:44] e-bred [2:53:44] o-t...