Full Pete Hegseth testimony, questioning at Senate hearing: US may 'escalate' Iran war if necessary

[0:01] Strengthening, make that possible. [0:05] 33 May 22nd, and we have the ability to do. [0:08] Next vote, adventure. [0:10] No chance. [0:13] I'm on. [0:14] I'm sorry. [0:15] Bye. [0:16] This is so good. [0:36] I can have this to be on this portion. [0:40] We should have never gotten used to it. [0:45] We should never have gotten used to it. [0:47] Over the years, we're going to get out of this morning run. [1:05] It's a long time. [1:06] It's just kind of appreciate to open it up. [1:09] A billion dollars we're spending every single day. [1:12] The American people do not support this work. [1:15] The American people do not support this work. [1:19] The world does not support this work. [1:24] Why are we in an unproprovened, unregul, reckless work? [1:28] We're talking how to go over the world, [1:30] including at the gas station. [1:32] The American people are paying over $5 down for gas stations. [1:36] We do not support this work. [1:40] Secretary, we have to stop this unprovened, [1:43] we have to stop this work. [1:50] The defense subcommittee will come to order. [1:57] Good morning. [2:02] Today, the subcommittee will convene for open hearing [2:04] to receive testimony from the Honorable Pete Hegsif, [2:06] Secretary of War, General Dan Cain, [2:08] Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, [2:11] Mr. Jay Hurst, performing the duties [2:13] of Undersecretary of War Comptroller. [2:16] Mr. Secretary, General Cain, and Mr. Hurst, [2:19] a warm welcome to you. [2:21] Thank you for your service to our great nation, [2:23] and thank you for appearing before the subcommittee today. [2:27] I want to first acknowledge the extraordinary demands [2:30] we place on all our volunteer force [2:32] and the military families who bear the weight of service [2:36] alongside their loved ones. [2:37] Quality of life and care for our service members [2:40] and their families are central to our mission [2:43] to continue to ensure the finest fighting force [2:46] in human history. [2:48] We owe everything to their sacrifice, [2:50] and send our thanks that they have answered the call to serve. [2:55] This hearing addresses issues that are deeply interconnected [2:58] and collectively define the national security challenge [3:00] of our time. [3:02] Let me begin with the budget. [3:04] We want to be good partners with the department [3:06] to ensure that our men and women in uniform [3:09] have every resource they need. [3:11] But I have serious concerns about how this bifurcated budget [3:14] splits discretionary and mandatory funding [3:18] on some of our highest priority programs. [3:22] We have significant gaps in needs for our warfighters [3:24] that we had to address in the FY26 appropriations process [3:28] because of the way mandatory was requested and enacted. [3:33] The subcommittee needs to understand [3:35] how the resources requested in this budget [3:37] translates into real, measurable improvements [3:40] in warfighting capability. [3:42] We also need to understand the consequences [3:45] of this funding approach. [3:47] We owe that level of accountability [3:49] to the American taxpayers. [3:51] Next on readiness. [3:53] The picture demands our honest attention. [3:55] Across the multiple domains, including munitions, [3:58] shipbuilding, innovation, and aviation, [4:00] questions persist about whether we are building the depth [4:04] and reliance required for a high-end conflict. [4:08] We have made progress in some areas. [4:09] I want to acknowledge the department's efforts [4:11] to address these questions. [4:13] However, progress is not the same as capability in delivering, [4:17] and capability delivery is what we need at this moment demands. [4:22] Finally, that brings me to the threat environment we currently face. [4:26] The world has grown more dangerous, more complex, [4:30] and more interconnected in its risks. [4:32] China is modernizing its military at a pace and scale that is alarming. [4:38] Russia continues to wage a brutal war of aggression, [4:41] and while Iran and their proxies have been dealt a severe blow, [4:45] they remain a threat. [4:47] Threats to Taiwan, Ukraine, NATO, Israel, our partners in the Gulf, [4:53] and our allies across the globe are not abstract concerns. [4:57] They are tests of America's credibility and resolve. [5:01] This subcommittee believes deeply in the power of deterrence, [5:05] but deterrence must be credible and credibility must be funded. [5:09] Finally, Mr. Secretary, both you and your deputy must be commended [5:13] for your commitment to reforming, modernizing, [5:16] and prioritizing innovation at the department. [5:19] I've been here a long time. [5:21] I've watched administrations come and go, [5:24] and I promise you that there are bureaucrats [5:26] who are trying to wait you out. [5:29] You must demand accountability at every level of your organization [5:32] to ensure that the change you have demanded is taking place. [5:36] Your call to move more quickly, inject competition, [5:40] allow new entrants to participate requires rigorous [5:43] and persistent oversight. [5:45] Otherwise, the forces in the Pentagon [5:47] will simply snap back to the status quo, [5:50] which does not serve our warfighters [5:52] or the United States taxpayer. [5:55] Again, thank you for being here. [5:57] The members of this subcommittee [5:58] take our oversight responsibilities seriously, [6:01] and we believe the American people deserve straight answers [6:04] on these consequential questions. [6:06] I look forward to an honest conversation [6:08] on how we are matching resources to priorities [6:11] and honoring our commitments to meet the moment. [6:14] Now, I recognize the distinguished ranking member, [6:17] Mrs. McCollum, for her opening remarks. [6:19] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [6:21] Thank you for your courtesy of extending this, [6:23] and thank you for your statement. [6:25] We have a lot to discuss. [6:27] Historical high-budget requests, the cost of the war in Iran. [6:30] Mr. Secretary, I appreciate this year [6:32] that you opened up a dialogue with Chairman Calvert, [6:35] myself, and with our authorizing Senate colleagues. [6:39] When we last met, we asked for information [6:41] to help us determine what the department needs [6:43] to ensure our national security. [6:45] We are still waiting for the information. [6:48] We've asked several times for a complete update [6:50] on munition levels, and it has not been provided. [6:53] This lacking of delivery timely information for the committee [6:57] is appearing to become a pattern. [6:59] We've requested briefings on the status of the funds [7:01] appropriated for Ukraine. [7:03] That took six months for us to be adequately briefed. [7:06] The reconciliation bill, which was enacted on July 4th of last year, [7:10] we still need the details of how the funds were allocated [7:14] and that were not provided to us until a 10-month wait. [7:18] Ten months we waited for that. [7:21] Details have been provided on Golden Dome, [7:24] but only $185 billion of the program, [7:28] and that's the initial research and development. [7:31] We still have no idea what the costs are following on [7:34] for procurement or maintenance of the program. [7:37] The department must do a better job [7:38] of sharing the information with us. [7:40] With respect to the war in Iran, [7:42] Mr. Secretary, I saw your comments [7:44] in the Armed Services Committee. [7:46] It was disappointing that you referred [7:47] to members of both parties as defeatists. [7:50] I know you won't bring personalities into this at this hearing, [7:54] and I will not questionize your patriotism, [7:57] nor will you question mine. [7:59] But the cost of this war continues to rise [8:01] as forces remain in the region. [8:03] The Appropriations Committee has a fiduciary responsibility [8:06] to the American people, so we will ask serious questions [8:09] that need to be answered, and that's our constitutional duty. [8:13] Chairman Calvert and I have asked for a breakout [8:15] of funding needs for Operation Epic Fury. [8:18] We need to know the impact of what it's having [8:20] on the services executing missions beyond the war. [8:24] The department notified us that the standard fuel price [8:28] for the services has increased from $154 to $195 a barrel. [8:36] That's more we have to pay for fuel, [8:38] then there's less money available for training and exercise [8:41] that the services need to perform. [8:43] And the department does not have enough [8:45] general transport authority to cover these activities [8:47] without a supplemental. [8:49] We must understand the department what it will do [8:52] if a supplemental is not sent to the Hill or enacted. [8:55] Now for the 25, excuse me, the 2027 request. [9:00] The baseline budget of the Department of Defense [9:02] requests over $200 million over last year's enacted level. [9:06] When combined with the mandatory funding [9:07] for a defense request throughout reconciliation, [9:10] that's an increase of $400 billion, [9:13] and that includes military construction. [9:16] Together, that's nearly 44 percent increase [9:20] of defense spending over last year. [9:22] And the President proposes a domestic investment cut [9:25] $75 billion, or 10 percent. [9:28] These cuts will have an impact on our national security [9:31] in many ways, particularly cuts to education. [9:34] The primary concern of the defense budget [9:37] is that the administration split between discretionary funding [9:41] and the appropriations control, [9:43] mandatory funding that we do not control. [9:46] Mr. Secretary, the administration is taking an enormous risk [9:49] by asking for $350 billion in priorities to reconciliation. [9:54] As we told you in our last meeting, [9:56] reconciliation is not the best way to fund the department. [9:59] Last year, reconciliation created broken glass. [10:02] Funding holds for vital programs [10:04] that the appropriators had to fix, [10:06] and that's why we need the information in a timely fashion. [10:09] Most of your mandatory funding requests [10:12] are for what you call presidential priorities, [10:14] golden dome, drone dominance, munitions, [10:17] the defense industrial base. [10:20] What the administration submitted to us for these programs [10:23] was a 28-page document. [10:26] And that's not enough to properly explain $350 billion in funding. [10:31] These programs will not be completed in one fiscal year, [10:34] and they will have tails. [10:35] That will put our department and our committee [10:37] in a very difficult situation next to Congress. [10:41] Finally, as the chair did, I'm going to take this opportunity [10:43] to thank all of our service members, active duty, [10:46] National Guard, and reserve components. [10:48] They serve with honor and distinction. [10:50] And I want to especially acknowledge those [10:52] who have served in harm's way, [10:53] including those who have fallen [10:55] and who have been injured in Operation Epic Fury. [10:57] Their families need to know that we will never forget them, [11:01] and that they have our enduring gratitude and support. [11:04] Gentlemen, I look forward to your testimony. [11:06] Mr. Chair, I yield back. [11:08] Thank you, Ms. McCollum. [11:09] Before we hear from our witness, [11:10] I'd like to recognize the distinguished chairman [11:12] of the full committee. [11:14] My good friend, Chairman Tom Cole, for any opening comments. [11:17] Thank you, Chairman Calvert, [11:18] Ranking Member McCollum, [11:20] my good friend, Ranking Member Rosa DeLore, [11:23] and all the members here. [11:24] And welcome, Mr. Secretary and General Kane to the committee, [11:28] and we appreciate all of you, [11:30] and certainly you as well, Under Secretary Hurst. [11:32] I didn't mean to leave you out there. [11:35] I joined Chairman Calvert [11:37] and members of the subcommittee [11:38] by saying at the outset of this hearing [11:40] that the men and women of our armed forces [11:42] are the finest in the world. [11:44] They deserve our full support and our commitment [11:46] to giving them the resources they need [11:48] that will keep them ready for the fights of today and tomorrow. [11:52] Without hesitation, I recognize that a strong, agile, [11:55] and effectively funded defense is not a mere priority. [11:59] It is a necessity. [12:00] The current threat environment facing the United States [12:03] is as serious and as layered as anything I have witnessed [12:07] during my time in Congress. [12:09] The convergence of challenges from China, Russia, North Korea, [12:13] and Iran demands that we all work together [12:16] with a level of seriousness and urgency [12:18] that frankly has not always characterized [12:20] our defense debates in recent years. [12:23] On the budget, I firmly believe that adequate [12:25] and stable defense funding is a national imperative, [12:29] and yet funding alone is not enough. [12:31] Every dollar must reflect clear priorities, [12:34] operational effectiveness, and strategic urgency. [12:37] The subcommittee has a responsibility to ask hard questions [12:41] about priorities, program performances, [12:43] and whether the department's acquisition processes [12:47] are keeping pace with the speed [12:50] at which our adversaries are moving. [12:52] To that end, I certainly associate myself [12:55] with Chairman Calvert's concerns about a bifurcated funding [12:59] of the Department of Defense. [13:01] We have questions on the assumption of mandatory funding [13:04] in the department's request. [13:06] We need you to be a partner with us on this front. [13:09] Transparency and communication are critical [13:11] to ensuring that we are aligned as closely [13:13] as we can be with your needs. [13:17] And frankly, I do worry in the future, [13:18] and I hope you address this in your remarks, [13:21] this is the second reconciliation package for defense, [13:25] and that creates cliffs for this committee in the future. [13:27] At some point, that funding disappears, [13:30] and we would have a massive increase [13:32] in discretionary funding to sustain it. [13:35] So how we do that going forward, when we do that, [13:38] is a major concern for this committee, [13:40] certainly for me personally. [13:42] I also want to speak directly about the issue [13:44] of our allies and partners. [13:46] American power is most effective when it's exercised [13:49] in concert with like-minded nations [13:51] who share our interests and our values. [13:53] As we look back on 250 years of our exceptional history, [13:58] the truth of that statement is apparent over and over. [14:03] From those who stood by us in our fight for independence [14:06] to the shared mission against evil during World War II, [14:10] tyranny falls when free nations stand together. [14:14] America first has never meant America alone. [14:17] American strength is not diminished [14:19] when allies shoulder their share. [14:22] It's multiplied, [14:23] and we must continue to sharpen our strategic advantages. [14:26] And I commend you for working to make sure [14:29] that our partners are beginning to step forward. [14:33] NATO remains a critical pillar of collective defense, [14:36] while our alliances across the Indo-Pacific [14:39] are indispensable to building a creditable deterrent [14:42] against rising aggression in that region. [14:45] I'm interested today in hearing [14:47] how this budget strengthens those partnerships [14:50] and how the department's working to ensure [14:52] that our allies are investing at levels commensurate [14:55] with the threats that they, [14:56] as well as we, face together. [14:59] The bottom line is simple. [15:00] We always hope for peace [15:01] while maintaining the strength to defend it. [15:04] We're committed to ensuring [15:05] our military remains unmatched, [15:07] our adversaries deterred, [15:09] and the American people protected. [15:11] Secretary Hegsup and General Klein, [15:13] we look forward to your candid dialogue. [15:16] The American people are counting on us to get this right. [15:19] I look forward to being a partner with you in that effort. [15:22] Again, I thank you for being here today, [15:24] and I thank you all for your distinguished service [15:26] to our country. [15:27] With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. [15:28] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [15:29] I would like to turn now to the ranking member [15:31] of the full committee, Mr. Deloro, [15:32] for any opening comments. [15:36] Thank you very much, Chairman Calvert [15:38] and Ranking Member McCollum, [15:39] and good to be with you, Chairman Cole, [15:42] and Secretary Hegsup and General Klein, [15:45] and Under Secretary Hurst. [15:46] Welcome to the committee. [15:49] The president is requesting $1.5 trillion [15:52] in defense funding for the coming fiscal year. [15:55] $1.5 trillion is an extraordinary sum of money. [16:00] Congress and the American people have concerns [16:03] about what you plan to do with this money. [16:05] In fact, we have concerns about what you are doing [16:09] with the more than $1 trillion [16:11] you already have from last year's appropriations [16:14] and reconciliation bills. [16:17] How much will the president's, quote, [16:19] skirmish in CENTCOM cost? [16:22] I know at a recent hearing, $25 billion was cited, [16:25] but we don't know what that includes [16:28] or for what time period. [16:30] This was only supposed to last six weeks. [16:33] We have thus far been unable [16:34] to get any reliable information [16:37] as to the true cost of this war. [16:43] The current ceasefire is tenuous at best, [16:46] with attacks on Gulf nations [16:48] happening just over the weekend. [16:50] The president tweeted he will not support [16:53] the latest communication from Iran, [16:56] which we might agree with if we knew what was in it. [17:00] But there has been a consistent lack [17:02] of transparency since this war began. [17:06] Media reports suggest there is intelligence [17:08] that indicates Iran can survive for months [17:11] at the current standoff, [17:13] which means the cost of deployment [17:16] of 50,000 service personnel [17:18] with their equipment will only increase, [17:21] as every additional day this war goes on [17:25] brings with it additional costs. [17:27] This administration has not presented Congress [17:30] with any kind of clear or coherent strategy. [17:34] Week to week, day to day, hour to hour, [17:38] the rationale shifts, the objectives change. [17:41] The end game is ill-defined when it is defined at all. [17:46] If the administration intends to ask Congress [17:48] for supplemental funding for the Iran war, [17:51] then you need to come back to Congress [17:53] and testify on that request specifically, [17:57] so that we and the American people can fully understand [18:01] what this administration has gotten us into [18:04] and how it plans to get us out of it. [18:08] The question must be answered at the end of this crisis. [18:11] What have we accomplished and at what cost? [18:14] And before you come to the Congress [18:17] for additional emergency funding, we need information. [18:20] Has the department or any of the services [18:22] utilized mandatory funding for operational activities [18:27] in CENTCOM? [18:28] If so, how much and from what account? [18:30] If you can provide us with that breakout, [18:32] it would be enormously helpful. [18:34] And again, what is the department's estimate [18:37] of the full cost of the operation against Iran to date? [18:43] The $1 trillion allocated for fiscal year 2026, [18:50] $1.5 trillion requested for fiscal year 2027, [18:55] and possibly $25 billion for an upcoming supplemental, [18:59] all as the total debt in the United States [19:03] has reached 100% of gross domestic product. [19:07] In other words, the national debt is now larger [19:10] than the U.S. economy, [19:12] and about twice the historic average, [19:15] according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. [19:19] The defense budget includes requested funding [19:23] for the expanded Golden Dome for America at $185 billion, [19:28] though those budget numbers are tenuous, [19:31] a new golden fleet in which three ships [19:34] are estimated to cost $43 billion, [19:37] and billions for private equity ventures, [19:41] which do not have well-defined processes [19:43] or sufficient transparency. [19:46] With gas prices and inflation numbers increasing, [19:49] the American people just want to afford [19:51] the basic necessities for everyday life. [19:55] But this administration is not doing anything [19:57] to help them with the cost of living crisis. [20:01] In fact, the administration is making the problem worse [20:05] by proposing dramatic cuts across the board [20:08] to domestic programs that support American families. [20:12] We have the most powerful military [20:15] in the history of humankind. [20:18] I am extraordinarily grateful, [20:19] as my other colleagues have pointed out, [20:21] to the men and women of our armed services [20:25] who sacrifice everything to keep us safe. [20:29] Their devotion to duty is exemplary, [20:33] and it must be matched by the seriousness [20:35] and the sobriety of those at the very top [20:39] of the chain of command. [20:40] And right now, I worry if that standard is being met. [20:44] Look forward to your testimonies today [20:47] and hearing the answers [20:49] to this committee's questions shortly. [20:51] Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back. [20:53] Thank the ranking member. [20:54] We'll now begin witness testimony. [20:56] Gentlemen, without objection, [20:57] your full written testimony will be placed in the record. [21:00] Secretary Hexhaf, we begin with you [21:01] for a brief summary of your remarks. [21:05] Secretary Hexhaf, [21:06] well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, ranking member. [21:08] Distinguished members of the committee, [21:10] I thank you for the opportunity to testify [21:11] in full support of President Trump's historic [21:14] 1.5 trillion fiscal year 2027 budget [21:17] for the Department of War. [21:19] The President's budget request [21:21] reflects the urgency of the moment, [21:23] as was mentioned by many, [21:26] addressing both the deferment of longstanding problems [21:29] as well as positioning our forces [21:31] for the current and future fight. [21:34] I'm honored to appear alongside General Dan Cain, [21:36] Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, [21:38] and Jay Hurst, our Chief Financial Officer. [21:41] And I'd like to start by thanking this committee [21:44] and Congress for your partnership [21:46] in securing the investments needed [21:48] for a stronger and more secure America. [21:51] A nation's ability to build, to innovate, [21:54] and to support the critical needs of its warfighters [21:57] at speed and at scale [22:00] is the foundation upon which its survival rests. [22:03] However, upon taking office on January 20th of 2025, [22:07] President Trump inherited a defense industrial base [22:11] that had been hollowed out by years of America last policies, [22:15] resulting in a diminished capability [22:18] and capacity to project strength. [22:20] Offshoring, outsourcing, cost overruns, [22:23] degraded capabilities. [22:26] Under the leadership of President Trump, [22:28] our builder in chief, [22:30] we are reversing this systemic decay [22:32] and putting our defense industrial base [22:34] back on a wartime footing. [22:37] Urgency informs everything we do at this department. [22:41] We are rebuilding a military [22:42] that the American people can be proud of, [22:45] one that instills nothing less [22:46] than the unrelenting fear in our adversaries [22:48] and confidence in our allies. [22:51] We fight to win in every scenario. [22:55] The $1.5 trillion budget request [22:57] put forward by the President [22:59] will build upon the historic $1 trillion FY26 top line [23:03] and will continue to reverse the four years [23:05] of underinvestment and mismanagement [23:08] of the Biden administration. [23:11] The $1.5 trillion budget will ensure [23:13] the United States continues to maintain [23:15] the world's most powerful and capable military [23:18] as we grapple with a complex threat environment [23:20] across multiple theaters. [23:23] Not to mention, the budget also includes [23:25] a historic troop pay increase, [23:28] building on the pay increases this committee has given, [23:31] and the budget eliminates all poor or failing barracks. [23:34] Quality of life for our troops is front and center [23:38] in this budget. [23:40] By supercharging our industrial capacity [23:42] and transforming how the department does business, [23:45] we are restoring American commercial dominance [23:48] at a pace unseen in generations, [23:50] transforming the defense industrial base [23:52] from the broken, slow-moving systems of the past. [23:56] We have flipped the Pentagon acquisition process [23:59] from a bureaucratic model to a business model, [24:02] decisively moving from an acquisition environment [24:04] paralyzed by bureaucratic red tape [24:07] into an outcomes-driven organization [24:09] focused on delivering the most for taxpayer dollars. [24:12] And Mr. Chairman, you're right, [24:13] it's a war of attrition against the Pentagon bureaucracy [24:16] every single day, and we intend to win it. [24:19] Over the past year, [24:20] through historic multi-year procurement agreements, [24:23] smart business deals, [24:25] we have sent ambiguous demand signals [24:27] to our industry partners to build more and build faster. [24:32] The result has been a surge, a revitalization [24:35] of our great American factories [24:37] and massive reinvestment in the skilled American workers [24:39] who serve as the industrial muscle behind our warriors. [24:45] Let me briefly provide you [24:46] with some concrete high-level metrics [24:47] of what we've accomplished over the last few months. [24:50] These are announced new facilities [24:52] and investments to support American warfighters. [24:55] The department has helped stimulate [24:56] more than 250 private investment deals in 39 states, [25:00] in 180 cities, in 150 different companies, [25:04] worth more than $50 billion. [25:06] This has resulted in 280 new and expanded facilities, [25:11] more than 18 million new square feet [25:13] of American manufacturing, [25:15] and more than 70,000 new American jobs. [25:19] These $50 billion in defense investments [25:22] in new plants, assembly lines, and factories [25:25] are private investments, not taxpayer dollars. [25:29] By completely transforming our department's business model, [25:32] American companies are investing in America [25:35] with their own capital, [25:37] a historic demonstration of American manufacturing [25:39] and defense revitalization, [25:41] all with their money, not Uncle Sam's. [25:44] This has never been done before [25:47] and is long overdue from a bureaucratic model [25:49] to a business model. [25:51] These investments equal great things for America, [25:54] American families, and American workers, [25:56] and help us ensure our warfighters [25:58] can defend this great country. [26:00] Together with the help of the policy updates [26:03] and appropriations passed by Congress, [26:05] President Trump's War Department [26:07] has begun to turn the lights back on [26:09] in manufacturing towns across this country [26:11] to forge a lethal arsenal of freedom. [26:15] Where our critical supply chains are threatened, [26:17] the Department of War has acted decisively [26:19] to inject capital, stimulate production, [26:22] and prevent adversarial exploitation. [26:25] We are firing up the American economic engine [26:28] at every level of the defense industrial base. [26:31] Every policy we pursue, [26:33] every budgetary item we request, [26:34] serves to ensure that this department remains laser-focused [26:37] on increasing lethality and survivability [26:39] of our fighting force from the front lines [26:42] to the factory floors. [26:44] This is, admittedly, a historic budget. [26:48] It is a fiscally responsible budget, [26:51] and it is a warfighting budget. [26:54] Under President Trump, we are restoring [26:55] the unbreakable might of American manufacturing [26:58] that we will need for generations. [27:00] We are providing for our warfighters, [27:01] and we are putting the people [27:03] and interests of this country first. [27:07] May Almighty God continue to watch over all of our troops, [27:10] and may we honor the legacy [27:11] of those brave Americans that we've lost. [27:14] That is our sacred mission [27:16] that we will continue to execute on. [27:18] Thank you again to this committee for your partnership, [27:21] and we look forward to answering your questions. [27:23] Thank you. [27:23] Thank you, Mr. Secretary. [27:24] General Cain, you're now recognized for your remarks. [27:27] Chairman Calvert, Ranking Member McCollum. [27:29] Chairman Cole, Ranking Member DeLauro, [27:31] thank you for having me, [27:33] and to all the members of the committee, [27:34] thank you for having me. [27:35] I'm honored here today to testify [27:38] alongside the Honorable Pete Hegseth [27:40] and the Honorable Jay Hurst [27:42] on the President's Fiscal Year 2027 budget, [27:45] and I'm grateful for the opportunity to speak [27:48] about the foundations of America's strength, [27:50] the 2.8 million members of our joint force. [27:54] I am continually inspired by the soldiers, [27:56] sailors, airmen, marines, guardians, [27:59] Coast Guardsmen, and civilians [28:02] standing the watch for our nation, [28:03] supported each and every day by their families. [28:06] They could have chosen anything in their path of service, [28:10] but they chose to serve our great country [28:12] and meet our nation's challenges [28:15] with courage, tenacity, and grit [28:17] that's keeping our nation strong and safe. [28:20] I would also like to express my deep gratitude [28:23] for the 40 members of the joint force [28:25] who we've lost in operations, combat, and training [28:29] during my time as chairman, [28:31] including 14 who passed during Operation Epic Fury, [28:35] and our most recent loss, First Lieutenant Key, [28:38] who valiantly gave his life trying to save a teammate [28:41] while deployed on a temporary duty assignment in Africa, [28:44] and we continue to hold hope for his teammate. [28:47] The Secretary and I are deeply grateful for each of them [28:50] and their families, [28:51] and their names will never be forgotten. [28:54] As chairman, my duty is to ensure our civilian leadership [28:57] has a comprehensive range of options, military options, [29:01] alongside the associated risks [29:03] to make the nation's hardest and most complex decisions. [29:07] I owe the President, the Secretary, [29:09] and the Congress the truth at every turn, [29:11] and my blueprint for this approach [29:13] has always been General George C. Marshall. [29:16] His firm commitment to civilian control [29:18] and a nonpartisan military remains my constant standard, [29:22] and I strive to follow his example [29:25] by working with each of you [29:28] and providing clear and candid nonpartisan military advice, [29:32] and to present this committee [29:33] with the clearest possible assessment of operational risk [29:37] and readiness and executability [29:40] within the unclassified environment [29:42] that we find ourselves in today. [29:45] As the chairman said, [29:46] we're operating in a delicate and dangerous time. [29:49] Global risk is scaling, [29:51] and the complexities of the modern battlefield [29:53] demand America's constant adaptation and innovation. [29:58] America's joint forces operational at its core, [30:02] purpose built for the realities of a complex world [30:05] where organized, trained, and equipped [30:08] to execute the most demanding missions across the globe [30:12] with unrivaled precision. [30:14] And over the last year, [30:16] our warfighters have consistently demonstrated [30:19] exactly what it means to be the most capable, [30:22] adaptable, and professional military on Earth. [30:27] We are able to accomplish this highly complicated work [30:30] because we draw from a deep, [30:32] enduring reservoir of training, [30:35] professionalism, and commitment. [30:38] Our ops tempo is high, [30:40] but we're designed to sustain it, [30:42] rebuilding our strength continuously. [30:45] We rebuild readiness every day. [30:47] We train every day. [30:48] We learn and sharpen our edge every day. [30:51] And driving this pace of change [30:54] and maintaining our superiority [30:56] requires timely, predictable, and sustained investment [31:00] and a partnership with this committee [31:02] and the broader Congress. [31:03] And I appreciate that. [31:05] And the resources that we'll discuss today [31:08] are critical to modernizing the joint force [31:11] and ensuring that if whatever threats emerge [31:14] or when called upon, our nation can win. [31:18] The president's budget supports the department's goals [31:20] of recharging the defense industrial base [31:23] and the national industrial base [31:25] while enhancing our military readiness. [31:27] We will continue to ensure our warfighters [31:30] are properly armed, globally integrated, and ready [31:34] while always taking care of our most precious thing, [31:37] and that is our people. [31:39] And while advancing the hardware [31:40] and technology essential to fight, [31:42] it's the character and competence of our people, [31:45] particularly the 1.8 million members [31:48] of our enlisted force who make us proud every day. [31:51] And they're represented today [31:53] by the senior enlisted advisor to the chairman, [31:56] United States Navy SEAL, Dave Isom, sitting behind me. [31:59] While we face dynamic and dangerous times, [32:02] I have absolute trust and confidence in our people [32:06] who every day execute the most challenging missions [32:10] with quiet professionalism. [32:12] And coupled with the American spirit to outthink, [32:16] outcompete, and relentlessly innovate, [32:18] we will maintain our decisive edge, [32:21] but doing so requires your continued partnership. [32:25] It is also graduation season [32:27] where we welcome a whole bunch of new members [32:30] to the joint force, [32:31] to include members like Second Lieutenant Archie Dennis, [32:34] United States Army, [32:36] who along with his Citadel classmates in South Carolina, [32:39] joined the joint force this weekend. [32:42] And I welcome he and all the other new graduates [32:44] to the joint force. [32:46] As I close, I humbly ask that we remember right now [32:49] our deployed teammates out there doing our nation's work, [32:52] going out into the darkness [32:54] to do the things that we ask them to do. [32:57] And I ask, as always, [32:58] that we remember not just the 40 fallen [33:01] that I mentioned earlier, [33:02] but all of our nation's fallen [33:04] and their families who soldier on. [33:06] Thank you, and I also look forward to your questions. [33:09] Thank you, I want to ensure each member [33:11] has a chance to ask questions, [33:12] so everyone will have five minutes for their remarks. [33:15] I'll begin by recognizing myself for five minutes. [33:18] Secretary Hexiv, for decades, Congress and the department [33:22] have sought acquisition reform and innovative technologies. [33:26] It's only since FY24 that the level of investment [33:29] started to catch up with the rhetoric. [33:32] The FY27 budget request includes over $950 million [33:36] for the Defense Innovation Unit, [33:39] $54.6 billion for the Defense Autonomous Warfare Group, [33:43] $580 million for the Joint Interagency Task Force 401, [33:47] and for the counter small UAS. [33:51] And I believe these investments [33:52] will deliver overdue capability. [33:55] And this subcommittee will continue to work with you [33:57] to ensure success. [33:59] I also note there's only $100 million [34:01] for the Accelerate the Procurement [34:03] and Fielding of Innovative Technology. [34:05] That's surprisingly low, given APFIT's success. [34:09] The subcommittee will continue to support APFIT, [34:12] as we have in the past, I invite you to join me [34:15] at the APFIT Day on the Hill, July 21st, [34:17] to see firsthand how APFIT [34:20] is delivering capabilities to the warfighter. [34:22] Consistent with the desire for injecting innovation at scale, [34:27] for decades, there's been increasing demand [34:29] for increasing resilience in the industrial base, [34:32] and more specifically, the supply chain. [34:35] The FY27 budget request includes over $20.2 billion [34:39] for the Office of Strategic Capital and $30.4 billion [34:42] for the Defense Production Act. [34:45] As you're aware, we're working closely [34:46] with the industrial base policy team [34:48] on the Civil Reserve Manufacturing Network [34:51] to ensure the department can qualify [34:53] and certify second and alternate sources [34:56] to maximize American manufacturing. [34:59] With the exception of DIU [35:00] and the Joint Interagency Task Force 401, [35:03] most of the investments listed are in mandatory funding. [35:08] What was the strategy to heavily rely [35:10] on the mandatory funding sector in this budget? [35:15] Well, thank you for the question, Mr. Chairman. [35:17] And I would first, I would thank you and this committee [35:22] for your efforts on acquisition reform, [35:24] many of which were had not been embraced [35:26] by the department before, [35:28] and a lot of templates on the table [35:30] that were there for us to fall in and run fast with. [35:32] And so speed, scale, cutting red tape, [35:36] reducing requirements where we can, [35:38] looking at things like DIU, Replicator, now the dog, [35:43] and the Defense Autonomous Working Warfare Group, [35:46] all of those were born of collaboration [35:49] with the committee and efforts of now reformers [35:51] we have in the department who are ready to run with it. [35:54] As it pertains to the budget, [35:56] I think there's a reality in this town [35:59] of what can get done and how it gets done. [36:02] And in a perfect world, [36:04] everything would get done in regular order, [36:06] and with a $1.5 trillion top line, [36:08] but there are a lot of challenges and dynamics, [36:11] some of which I don't control. [36:12] And ultimately, we look forward to working [36:14] with the committee to ensuring however it shakes out, [36:18] that it's full transparency with you [36:20] and maximizing options for the department. [36:23] And I think the reconciliation last year was a new vehicle, [36:28] so it took some time, [36:29] especially because we're doing new things, [36:30] Office of Strategic Capital, different avenues. [36:33] So figuring out how to deploy that took longer than we'd like, [36:37] but we're committed to ensuring this year, [36:39] with that as a vehicle, part of it, [36:41] that we do it in concert with you [36:43] to ensure the most important things, [36:44] whether they're in that or in regular order, [36:47] are included in the budget. [36:56] I understand the desire for flexibility. [36:58] I understand why we're breaking this up in order to, [37:03] in some chunks, I guess, more digestible [37:06] to some degree politically. [37:08] But I would hope we can get a supplemental bill here soon. [37:15] Obviously, we know of the munitions issue, [37:18] and we know of the cost of this conflict, [37:22] and we know the cost of other conflicts. [37:25] And so we need to repay those O&M accounts [37:28] that are going to be used, I suspect, [37:29] in order to pay for this ongoing operation. [37:32] So any idea when we're going to get this supplemental? [37:37] We're well aware of all those dynamics. [37:40] I think, first of all, the munitions issue [37:43] has been foolishly and unhelpfully overstated. [37:46] We know exactly what we have. [37:48] We have plenty of what we need. [37:49] And the reason we're accelerating a lot of this [37:53] is because the department's been static [37:54] in how it does this kind of business, [37:56] not to mention the amount that was given to Ukraine [37:58] for years and years. [37:59] So we are getting after changing that dynamic [38:02] so that we're not getting 100 more of something, [38:05] but the companies are investing so there's new plants, [38:08] so you're getting 2X, 3X, 4X of those munitions [38:11] in future years, because that's what we need. [38:13] That's what our allies and partners through FMS require, [38:17] and we just haven't been delivering it. [38:18] So we're in good shape on that front. [38:21] Whatever we think we need, we will submit. [38:23] But I'll say, even in the conduct of the conflict, [38:26] working with the chairman and Admiral Cooper, [38:29] ensuring that any munitions we're using, [38:31] we know what we're trading off of to preserve capabilities [38:34] so we have maximum optionality across the globe, [38:36] which we do. [38:38] Again, though, it would be helpful [38:39] to get the supplemental sooner rather than later [38:41] for we can get to work on it. [38:43] And I'll recognize Ms. McCollum for her question. [38:46] Thank you, Mr. Chair. [38:48] Mr. Secretary, the House Armed Services Oversight hearing, [38:51] Mr. Hurst stated that the costs for the War for Operation Epic Fury [38:57] are at $25 billion. [38:59] Am I correct with that number that you used to the hearing, [39:01] Mr. Hurst? [39:03] Yes, ma'am, that was the cost at that time. [39:05] At that time. [39:07] I would request that you provide the committee, [39:10] in writing, the specifics of what the department [39:13] will be requesting in the supplemental, [39:15] and the breakouts for the following costs. [39:17] We talked munitions, and Mr. Secretary, [39:20] I think we'd have a more robust discussion on that [39:22] if we were in a classified setting, [39:24] but I respect what you shared with us. [39:27] But this is what I'd like. [39:29] A breakout for military personnel, operational activities, [39:35] additional maintenance for deployed ships, [39:39] munitions used, equipment lost, and updated fuel costs. [39:45] Now, we need to know the funding required [39:47] to cover the damage to the U.S. facilities. [39:51] And if there are any agreements from our regional allies, [39:53] we hear things in the press that would be helping [39:56] for any new facilities or improvements in CENTCOM. [40:00] Now, Mr. Hurst, here's the rub. [40:03] We need that by June 11th. [40:06] We mark up our bill. [40:08] And some of these are not new asks, [40:11] but I thought I'd drill down [40:12] and be just a little more specific for you. [40:16] So, I know you're gonna do your best. [40:20] We'll take the homework assignment in pieces. [40:22] Anything you can provide would be great. [40:24] Now, under the War Powers Resolution, [40:26] the administration has 60 days to conclude activities [40:29] unless Congress has declared war, provided authorization. [40:33] Congress has not done that. [40:35] And I know there's different opinions [40:36] and it changes from day to day [40:38] whether or not the War Powers Clock is paused. [40:41] But this law states beyond May 2nd, [40:44] the administration needs congressional authorization [40:46] to continue military operations. [40:48] And the president just recently said yesterday [40:51] that epic fury is not over. [40:53] Military operations have continued. [40:55] We have a naval blockade. [40:57] And both sides are exchanging fire. [41:00] They did so over the weekend. [41:02] Speaker Johnson, in my opinion, [41:04] should put an authorization on the floor this week. [41:06] But, Mr. Secretary, if Congress does not authorize, [41:10] if we don't authorize this, [41:12] to continue military operations against Iran, [41:15] you're gonna have to have a plan put in place [41:18] to draw down our troops, to reset the region, [41:21] to protect our assets. [41:24] And I'm wondering, [41:26] and that might be in a classified situation, [41:28] but could you provide this committee with Plan B? [41:30] Because if we go there, [41:32] we're gonna have to reset our budget after June 11th, [41:36] if the War Powers Act, in my opinion, [41:40] should be invoked and it comes to Congress. [41:43] But we don't know what the outcome would be. [41:45] Do you have a Plan B? [41:48] Ranking Member, I would say we have a plan for all of that. [41:52] We have a plan to escalate, if necessary. [41:54] We have a plan to retrograde, if necessary. [41:58] We have a plan to shift assets. [41:59] Certainly in this setting, [42:00] we wouldn't reveal what the next step may be, [42:03] considering the gravity of the mission [42:05] that the President is undertaking [42:06] to ensure that Iran never has a nuclear bomb. [42:08] Well, Mr. Secretary, as you know, [42:09] we can be in receipt of that in a different situation. [42:12] And we would also like that by June 11th. [42:16] With that, I yield back. [42:20] Thank you, gentlelady. [42:22] Mr. Chairman. [42:23] Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. [42:25] Mr. Secretary, as I said in my opening remarks, [42:28] I have concerns about the use of reconciliation. [42:31] I don't have any concerns about the amount [42:33] and the effort to restore the industrial base. [42:36] You're to be commended for that. [42:38] And frankly, I think we've underinvested for a long time. [42:41] So I'm happy to see a robust number. [42:43] I am worried about the ability to sustain that number [42:47] through the reconciliation process. [42:49] At some point, that money disappears and will be. [42:54] So give me some sense of how much of this reconciliation money [42:58] is one-time expense that you expect to either use for procurement [43:02] that you may not need to do again for a long time [43:05] or inject in the industrial base. [43:07] How much is for day-to-day operations that we would need, [43:12] frankly, to think of as a long-term recurring expense? [43:15] It's a good question, Mr. Chairman. [43:17] And I'll defer to Jay on details. [43:19] But I would say a big take, for example, [43:22] the deals that are being cut that will be funded here, [43:24] that ultimately look at companies [43:26] that make exquisite weapons systems for us. [43:28] And they say, in exchange for a five to seven-year contract, [43:31] which committees like this have authorized for us, [43:34] the authorizing committees, not the appropriating committees, [43:36] the authorizing committees. [43:38] And now, because they have that clear demand signal, [43:41] they're able to invest in a new plant, [43:43] and they're paying for it. [43:44] And that's what I talked about in my open remarks. [43:45] So they're building two or three new facilities, [43:47] but we're committed to paying for those munitions [43:49] for five to seven years from this budget. [43:51] And ultimately, but the nice part is we're saving money [43:54] because there's no inflation. [43:55] It's at the cost of it today, [43:57] even when we buy it seven years from now. [43:59] And that's why you're seeing $331 billion in munitions [44:02] as part of this budget. [44:03] There's a rocket fuel component to this, [44:06] given the underinvestment that exists inside this budget. [44:10] There will be some tail, obviously. [44:11] And as I acknowledged up front, [44:14] a higher top line from this department's perspective [44:16] is always a welcome thing. [44:18] But the intention is not to get anyone stuck [44:20] in a certain place, [44:20] but to address the needs of the moment, [44:22] cut different deals, [44:24] create new dynamics where companies actually invest. [44:27] So we have, you know, [44:28] this committee knows the exquisite munitions [44:31] that we're gonna be using five to seven years from now, [44:33] no matter what. [44:34] It's about time we look into the future [44:36] the way we are with this budget, [44:38] but you have to fund that. [44:39] And so I think that's a big chunk of an increase [44:42] that you see. [44:42] I mean, if you're investing [44:43] in the shipbuilding industrial base, [44:45] the defense industrial base, [44:47] housing and barracks, [44:49] all of that increase troop pay. [44:52] We're looking at increasing the top line [44:54] of the entire force by 50,000 troops. [44:56] That's an investment into the future. [44:58] So I would acknowledge that a lot of this [45:00] does have follow on cost, [45:02] but some of it is something we're gonna pay for now [45:04] and benefit from in the future. [45:05] But Jay, I would defer to you. [45:07] Yeah, Mr. Chairman, in this, [45:08] there's $113 billion for investments [45:11] in the defense industrial base. [45:12] I would characterize that as a one time plus up [45:15] for catch up, $35 billion for FSRM [45:18] to fix all of our poor and failing barracks [45:20] and other facilities of the department, [45:22] and also some catch up investments in AI and autonomy. [45:25] And so if you look at what we're doing with mandatory, [45:27] probably about $200 billion of that [45:28] is a one time expense. [45:30] We come down to 1.23 for requested top line for FY28. [45:34] And so we think we can sustain these investments [45:36] over the FIDAP with discretionary dollars after this. [45:40] Well, that's reassuring. [45:42] And again, I don't have any disagreement [45:43] with what you're trying to accomplish at all. [45:46] I would remind you that, frankly, [45:49] the use of reconciliation depends on political support [45:53] in Congress that can be very transitory. [45:55] And so it's a high-risk strategy [45:59] as opposed to building things into the baseline. [46:02] But again, I'm supportive of what you're trying to do [46:04] in terms of recharging the industrial base. [46:07] I think it's long overdue. [46:08] Let me ask you a specific question. [46:11] And you may want to get back to me on this. [46:13] I don't know, but we've had some discussion over, [46:18] you know, we lost one E3 on the ground. [46:22] Thank goodness, looks like no crew loss. [46:26] This committee's been interested in investing in the E7. [46:31] Pentagon signed a contract for five additional planes, [46:36] not in the Air Force budget. [46:38] Is there going to be a fix to that? [46:40] Or where are we at on thinking about the E7? [46:45] I'm well aware of that dynamic. [46:47] I know our department had taken the position [46:49] that it was airborne or other satellite ISR [46:53] that was probably going to be capable [46:55] of a lot of that in the future. [46:56] But I think that mindset was indicative [46:58] of a mindset that we've shed, [47:02] which is the divest to invest mindset, [47:05] which was an austerity mindset, [47:07] that we're going to get in continued resolution [47:09] after continued resolution. [47:10] So we've got to get rid of these platforms [47:11] in order to invest in these platforms. [47:13] And there are gaps that need to still be filled. [47:15] And there are systems that still need to be funded [47:17] that are used on the battlefield right now, [47:19] say, MQ-9s, A-10s, you name it. [47:23] I think this and the E7 is one of those. [47:25] So we've actually sent a budget amendment [47:28] to OMB to add that. [47:30] I think it has a future. [47:31] It has a place on the battlefield. [47:32] And we'll get more information for you on that as well. [47:35] Well, I appreciate that. [47:36] And I particularly, though, appreciate the mindset. [47:39] I think you're 100% right. [47:40] I've seen this over and over again [47:43] about eliminating platforms on the idea [47:45] we would immediately use that money for new things. [47:48] And quite often, it just simply didn't happen. [47:50] We lost the capability, but we did not move forward [47:54] with the investment that we needed. [47:55] So again, thank you for rethinking that. [47:59] We've got a lot more questions, [48:00] but so does the entire committee, Mr. Chairman. [48:02] So with that, I'll yield back. [48:04] I just want to make one quick comment [48:06] when you're talking about fixing barracks and facilities. [48:08] I hope we also fix the property management systems [48:11] throughout the department, [48:13] which is woefully needs attention. [48:17] With that, I recognize the ranking member, Ms. Delaro. [48:20] Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. [48:22] Mr. Secretary, the National Security Strategy says, [48:25] American national power depends on a strong industrial sector [48:29] capable of meeting both peacetime [48:30] and wartime production demands. [48:32] And the National Defense Strategy directs DOD [48:35] to, quote, supercharge the defense industrial base. [48:38] DOD's 2027 budget overview [48:42] appears to use that same framing. [48:44] Yet your department's budget request cuts over $5 billion [48:50] from the industrial base in the aviation sector alone, [48:54] effectively shutting down [48:56] all current army aviation platforms. [49:00] These are current production platforms [49:03] the force relies on for lift, for sustainability, [49:06] disaster response, homeland missions, et cetera. [49:09] How did the department arrive at the conclusion [49:12] that reducing procurement [49:14] for these army aviation platforms strengthens [49:17] rather than weakens the aviation industrial base? [49:21] Well, I very much appreciate that question, [49:22] and I actually think it's something [49:24] we're taking another look at. [49:25] I think it's not that every aspect of... [49:28] There are some very good things [49:29] in the Army Transformation Initiative, [49:31] and there are some things that we've needed [49:33] to get another look at. [49:34] And so I think you'll see a review [49:36] of some of those things, [49:38] and we'll get back to you on that. [49:39] The subcommittee of the aviation sector? [49:41] Yes, ma'am. [49:41] Okay, and with that, [49:42] but was there an analysis about the impact [49:47] of the requested procurement reduction? [49:49] Did you all do an analysis of production lines, [49:52] suppliers, workforce, restart risk, [49:55] prior to the decision to cut the funds? [49:59] We'll get that from the Army and get that to you. [50:01] I don't have it in front of me, [50:02] but I would imagine something was done. [50:03] Okay, I very, very much would love to see that [50:06] before the subcommittee marks up [50:08] the appropriations bill coming up. [50:11] Let me just quickly... [50:13] Can you provide the committee in writing [50:16] the department's assessment [50:18] of the minimum sustaining production rate [50:22] for the Blackhawk and Chinook industrial base, [50:25] the supplier base risks associated [50:27] with this budget request, [50:29] and the funded mitigation plan, [50:32] if production falls below those levels? [50:36] Can you provide us with that information? [50:38] I think that's critically important. [50:40] I think we should get that to you, [50:41] and I think those platforms are critical [50:42] to the force right now, [50:43] and we need to make sure we're able to sustain that. [50:45] I think you made the point, [50:46] you all have that industrial base readiness [50:48] is a strategic issue. [50:50] It's what the national security strategy recognizes, [50:54] and I look forward to hearing more [50:57] about how cutting the billion dollars [50:59] in the base investment aligns with that shared goal. [51:02] Let me just, a question to you, General Kane. [51:05] Despite the precipitous drop in procurement [51:07] for Army aviation platforms, [51:09] your budget request invests heavily in modernization. [51:13] I'm a believer in modernization. [51:15] I think that's necessary. [51:17] I support investing in future capability, [51:19] but Congress also has to understand the transition risk. [51:24] The department is asking us to accept reduced procurement [51:29] of aircraft the force uses today, [51:31] while relying on future systems that are not yet fielded. [51:37] And General, from a joint force readiness perspective, [51:41] what is the department's plan [51:43] to avoid a mobility lift sustainment gap [51:48] if current aviation capacity declines faster [51:52] than replacement capability arrives? [51:55] What are the decision points [51:56] where the department would revisit the reductions [51:59] if future vertical lifts schedule slip, [52:02] if costs rise or operational demand [52:04] remains higher than expected? [52:07] General Kane- Well, Ranking Member, [52:08] I appreciate the question. [52:09] And any time we're looking at military options [52:13] to our political leaders, [52:14] we do bake in and can carefully consider [52:17] that transitional risk, [52:19] because it links back to risk to force, [52:23] our military forces, and risk to missions. [52:25] And as we look forward over the life cycle of this budget [52:29] and beyond into the FIDEP, [52:31] you know, we're always looking at the evolution [52:34] of those operational plans [52:36] and then the decision points along the way [52:39] to make sure that we can match the combat capability [52:43] and capacity required to achieve the desired effects [52:48] that are baked within those operational plans [52:51] across the COCOMs. [52:52] And I commend the Army, who's looking closely [52:55] at the two platforms that you're most interested [52:58] through your line of questioning [53:00] and the work that Under Secretary Obadal has been doing [53:03] to look at rotary wing lift requirements [53:07] as we move to the future. [53:08] But in the end, we have to have mobility [53:10] on the battlefield. [53:12] It has to be survivable in the conflicts [53:16] and engagements it will have. [53:18] And so we remain very closely focused [53:21] on those requirements, ma'am. [53:22] Well, I appreciate that. [53:24] And my only concern is not whether modernization [53:28] is important, but I understand with some of those efforts [53:31] that we are looking for a future date is next year, [53:35] the year after, and so forth, [53:37] because it's not been fielded. [53:41] But what we need to take a look at, [53:43] and I think you understand this, [53:44] is whether the department is managing this transition [53:48] in a responsible way. [53:49] In my view, what we cannot afford to do [53:52] is to create a near-term aviation gap. [53:56] We weaken the supplier base and then ask the Congress [54:00] to come back and rebuild that capability [54:03] and that capacity at a greater cost. [54:06] Because when you destroy the infrastructure, [54:08] it's very, very difficult to bring that back [54:11] and the skilled workforce that it takes [54:13] to deal with that. [54:14] So very clearly, this information, [54:17] and if you can supply this to our committee, [54:20] would be very, very helpful in our moving forward. [54:22] I yield back, Mr. Chairman. [54:23] Thank you, John Leiter. [54:24] Mr. Womack. [54:27] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [54:28] You know, you thread a very difficult needle [54:35] in that, and there's been a lot of comments made, [54:37] and I associate myself with a lot of these comments [54:39] on the fact that here we are trying to figure out [54:43] a base budget at the same time of a supplemental [54:46] and at the same time talking about reconciliation [54:49] in order to be able to meet the needs [54:51] of the joint force going forward. [54:54] And my friend, the ranking member of the full committee, [54:58] talks about capability gaps. [55:00] When you have to do it this way [55:03] because of the lack of certainty [55:05] and the political dynamics around this dais, [55:08] and, of course, throughout Congress, [55:10] there are going to be gaps in capability. [55:14] Is that correct, Mr. Secretary? [55:17] I mean, we do everything we can [55:18] to try to minimize that by planning [55:20] what could play off against something else, [55:21] but inevitably there are places [55:23] where we have to make adjustments. [55:24] You're right, sir. [55:25] I want to get somewhat parochial here [55:28] for just a minute on the subject [55:29] of our reserve component, [55:31] and this question would be for General Cain. [55:34] Last month, 22 adjuncts general, [55:36] all of those who command fighter units [55:38] in their state signed a letter to Congress [55:40] calling for multi-year procurement authority [55:42] to buy between 72 and 100 new fighters annually. [55:46] 13 of 24 fighter units lack recapitalization plans. [55:50] On the Army side, all of our states [55:52] suffer from a lack of reimbursement [55:53] for responding to the call of their communities. [55:56] Between fiscal 20 and fiscal 24, [55:58] over 71 million was paid by states to the Guard, [56:02] but the Guard never saw that reimbursement. [56:05] As you may know, any non-federal entity [56:08] reimbursing a federal entity [56:09] causes the funding to go to the Treasury, [56:12] and NGB never sees that reimbursement. [56:15] Our Guard is paying to respond [56:16] to a disaster out of O&M funds, [56:18] then having to pay more to maintain it. [56:22] As the primary combat reserve for our active force, [56:24] the Guard continues to play an outsized role [56:27] in the nation's defense. [56:28] In fact, General Nordhaus recently said [56:31] that our National Guardsmen are fully integrated [56:33] as part of the joint force in Operation Epic Fury. [56:36] So here's my point. [56:38] The Guard and Reserve are being asked to do more. [56:41] Epic Fury, Midnight Hammer, border security missions, [56:44] domestic deployments, and the many all-hazard responses [56:48] across the 54. [56:50] They are as much in the fight as the regular component. [56:56] So, what is the Department's plan to ensure [56:58] that the Guard and Reserve are recapitalized, [57:00] maintained, and reimbursed at a pace consistent [57:04] with their operational role [57:06] in the national defense strategy? [57:10] Sir, I'm assuming that question's coming to me [57:12] since you're looking at me. [57:14] You would be correct. [57:15] Yes, sir. Thank you, sir. [57:17] You know, as a member of the Guard, [57:19] a proud member of the Guard, [57:21] I'm mindful that every day when you mobilize the Guard, [57:24] you mobilize the United States people. [57:27] And they are now much more than a tactical reserve. [57:30] They're a strategic reserve. [57:32] The decisions on recapping the fighter community live, [57:36] obviously, within our civilian leadership. [57:38] But the requirements that they're out there getting after [57:41] every day, as you alluded to, sir, [57:44] are substantive and long-lasting [57:47] beyond just the Title 32 force. [57:49] What I'm always inspired by is the professionalism [57:53] of the Guard and the Reserves, [57:56] who get more out of an airplane than one might think. [58:00] I mean, I go out there to Andrews often [58:02] and still get to fly. [58:04] And my crew chiefs are master sergeants [58:07] and senior master sergeants [58:09] who've been on a particular airplane [58:11] for a long, long time. [58:12] So they'll continue to force extend that capability [58:15] due to the professionalism that they have. [58:18] It doesn't mean we don't have to take a hard look at recap [58:21] and make sure that the fourth generation airplanes [58:23] are on a pathway to fifth and sixth gen [58:26] as the department continues to look at what we're solving for. [58:34] Mr. Chairman, if we have another round of questions, [58:36] I'll come back with another, [58:38] because my next question is probably not going to yield me [58:40] enough time, and I'll yield back the balance. [58:43] Mr. Cuair. [58:44] Thank you, Mr. Chairman, [58:46] ranking member, Mr. Secretary, all of y'all. [58:48] Thank you for, and all the men and women, [58:50] thank you for your service. [58:52] I want to ask you about the Western Hemisphere. [58:54] I want to talk to you about Mexico and then the border. [58:58] First of all, thank you for the work that y'all are doing [59:01] in the Western Hemisphere. [59:03] I've always said that we're looking at other parts [59:05] of the world. [59:05] We have to look at our own backyard, [59:07] and we got to make sure that the Western Hemisphere [59:10] is working with us. [59:12] So thank you for that. [59:15] Anything y'all want to add to the work [59:16] that y'all are doing there, [59:17] I would ask you to talk to us a little bit about it. [59:21] Mexico is the other one, very important, [59:23] very important part of us. [59:25] Michael, Congressman Michael McCall and myself, [59:28] we're down there, we push for the Special Operations [59:31] Forces SEAL to do training exercises. [59:34] And for the first time, we actually have military forces [59:38] in Mexico, which is very unique. [59:40] And again, congratulations on that. [59:43] If you can tell us what they're doing, [59:45] and we need to see more of that. [59:47] We also have, talking about the Guard also, [59:50] we have the, I believe the California Guard is now, [59:53] for the first time, a partnership with Mexico. [59:56] We've been pushing, I've been pushing Texas, [59:59] but California got there before we did. [1:00:01] But that's good. [1:00:02] And talk a little bit about that. [1:00:05] Also on the border, I want to thank you [1:00:07] and the men and women of Joint Task Force Southern Border [1:00:11] for the work that they're doing on the homeland. [1:00:13] They're in my area, Laredo and other places. [1:00:17] But I want to draw your attention to one particular threat. [1:00:20] That is the accelerating demands. [1:00:23] The cartels are not only watching what's happening in Ukraine, [1:00:27] but they're learning from it. [1:00:28] And they're, we're hearing from credible reports [1:00:32] about cartels looking at fiber optic drone systems. [1:00:36] And we all know what that is. [1:00:39] And my question is, what is the department doing [1:00:42] to get ahead of this threat? [1:00:44] How are you investing in the counter UAS capabilities [1:00:48] to defeat fiber optics drone systems? [1:00:51] And what lessons are we learning from what's happening? [1:00:55] You know, the procurement, the bureaucrats, [1:00:57] without due respect, it takes a long time [1:01:00] to get our systems over the cartels. [1:01:03] They got the money. [1:01:04] They don't have to go through a procurement system. [1:01:06] They'll just buy the drones and they're out manning us [1:01:10] on the Mexican side along the border. [1:01:12] So thank you. [1:01:13] And if you can address that or the chairman also. [1:01:17] Well, thank you, Congressman. [1:01:19] I very much appreciate your efforts in this realm [1:01:21] for a very long time. [1:01:22] And I think you see in the national security strategy, [1:01:24] the national defense strategy, [1:01:26] Western Ham and Homeland is priority number one. [1:01:28] We may pace to the ability on the first island chain, [1:01:31] but priority number one is here. [1:01:34] And you've seen it through [1:01:35] America's Counter Cartel Coalition [1:01:36] and getting after the designated terrorist organizations [1:01:39] that are trafficking drugs and humans in the United States, [1:01:41] something you've been talking a lot about. [1:01:43] And that's the beginning of our defense in depth. [1:01:45] It starts down there where they produce and where they move. [1:01:48] Then into Mexico, where we have had [1:01:50] an unprecedented amount of partnership, [1:01:52] and we appreciate that. [1:01:53] We would encourage Defensa and Marina [1:01:56] to continue where they can to partner and do more. [1:02:01] That's the expectation of the United States government, [1:02:03] of the Mexican government, [1:02:04] to step up so that we don't have to. [1:02:06] And then sealing that Southwest border [1:02:09] is the defense of the American people. [1:02:10] It's the defense of the homeland. [1:02:11] And you talk to the troops that are down there doing that, [1:02:13] they're proud of it. [1:02:15] We also have multiple national defense areas there, [1:02:18] which are controlled by DOW, [1:02:20] where we can do rapid testing [1:02:21] on counter UAS, [1:02:24] Jaietta 401 capabilities. [1:02:26] So we're using those places [1:02:28] to streamline the process [1:02:29] by which we see what the cartels are trying to do, [1:02:31] and get after it with new capabilities, [1:02:33] that we can then field elsewhere, [1:02:34] also learning from Ukraine in the process. [1:02:36] I would defer to the chairman. [1:02:38] Sir, I'll just add a few things onto this. [1:02:41] It's the Russia-Ukraine lessons learned [1:02:44] and the application of those lessons [1:02:46] by other actors like cartels [1:02:49] is one we're focused a lot on. [1:02:51] It's going to require a whole of government effort. [1:02:54] As the secretary mentioned, [1:02:56] we do have joint interagency task force, 401, [1:03:00] led by an incredible Army One Star, [1:03:02] Brigadier General Matt Ross, [1:03:04] who's focused solely in a chairman's controlled activity. [1:03:08] So 401 reports up to me, [1:03:10] and in turn then to the secretary, [1:03:12] to make sure that we're entrepreneurially looking [1:03:15] at how to sense, see, detect, and defeat [1:03:18] the range of small UAS threats. [1:03:22] And, you know, [1:03:24] General Ross was just out in CENTCOM [1:03:27] looking at some of the challenges [1:03:28] that they're having over there. [1:03:30] It'll continue to be an area of significant focus [1:03:33] for the joint force, sir. [1:03:35] Well, my time is up, [1:03:36] but I want to ask you to continue working with Mexico. [1:03:40] You do have unprecedented partnerships, [1:03:44] but the more we can push them, they're allies. [1:03:46] There's a historical sensitivity, we know why, [1:03:51] but the more you can push them [1:03:53] to get them to work with us, that would be great. [1:03:56] Thank you so much for all of y'all. [1:03:58] Thanks, gentlemen. [1:03:59] Chairman Rogers. [1:04:01] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:04:03] Secretary Hegseth, General Cain, Mr. Hearst, [1:04:06] thank you for being here, [1:04:09] and thank you, more importantly, [1:04:10] for your service to the country. [1:04:13] The 2026 National Defense Strategy [1:04:19] makes clear that China is the pacing challenge, [1:04:25] and this budget request puts real resources [1:04:28] behind that nomenclature, [1:04:31] including $11.7 billion for the Pacific Deterrence Initiative. [1:04:39] My concern is that we are not just competing [1:04:43] against China's military capability. [1:04:48] We're competing against the speed [1:04:52] at which China can build, replace, and influence. [1:04:59] Where are some capability gaps [1:05:04] when it comes to a potential conflict with the PRC? [1:05:09] And General Cain, how will your priorities posture [1:05:14] the joint force to close those gaps? [1:05:18] Chairman, thanks for the question. [1:05:21] And, you know, the speed at their production capability [1:05:24] is one of the reasons why I'm grateful [1:05:27] for the full team's partnership [1:05:30] on speeding up the U.S. defense industrial-based efforts, [1:05:35] as well as the national industrial-based efforts. [1:05:39] And I'd really like to thank [1:05:41] those mom-and-pop machine shops [1:05:43] and second-, third-, fourth-tier suppliers [1:05:46] that live in all of your districts [1:05:48] who are also increasing speed and capability [1:05:52] without losing quality [1:05:54] across the entirety of our manufacturing system. [1:05:57] And it's going to require all of that. [1:05:59] And when we look at the range of capabilities [1:06:02] that we must have to be properly armed [1:06:05] and globally integrated, that extends to things like, [1:06:09] you know, long-range fires [1:06:10] and really an ability to arm our joint force [1:06:15] to win from the seabed to cislunar space [1:06:18] in every single domain in there. [1:06:20] And I'll defer to the comptroller [1:06:23] and to the secretary to talk [1:06:24] about the particular elements, [1:06:27] but the goal is the range and mix of capabilities [1:06:30] that creates outsized dilemmas for Xi Jinping [1:06:35] and others that are out there [1:06:36] to ensure that we maintain and sustain deterrence. [1:06:40] Thank you. [1:06:41] The President, amen. Thank you. [1:06:43] Second, the war between the U.S. and Iran [1:06:49] reinforces an old lesson, [1:06:52] which is that modern conflict comes down to attrition. [1:06:59] China has been able to produce naval ships [1:07:04] at a pace our industrial base can't match. [1:07:09] The ships are not as large as ours, [1:07:11] but quantity has a quality of its own. [1:07:16] How are we postured for an economy of force in the Pacific, [1:07:23] particularly if Taiwan is invaded? [1:07:29] Mr. Well, sir, channeling my inner Klausowitz, [1:07:33] which is always something I try to remember, [1:07:36] the big moving parts of war fighting. [1:07:39] You know, we're not really doing economy of force work [1:07:42] in the Pacific, as you alluded to, sir, and others have. [1:07:45] It's our primary focus. [1:07:48] And so on a daily, you know, on a daily basis, [1:07:52] we come to the secretary [1:07:54] with a range of military options across the world [1:07:58] so that he and the president can carefully consider [1:08:02] those military actions and associated risks. [1:08:05] It all comes back to the budgetary tools [1:08:08] that you'll hopefully give us [1:08:10] and the authorities to achieve those capabilities. [1:08:13] And as we look, for example, at shipbuilding, [1:08:16] which you talked about, I'm grateful for the work [1:08:19] that the Navy is doing to scale that effort [1:08:23] to ensure that we offer and continue to offer [1:08:27] those range of options to our civilian leaders [1:08:30] here in the United States. [1:08:33] quickly to epic fury. [1:08:38] Our fight with Iran has confirmed [1:08:42] what defense planners had long warned about. [1:08:47] Iran doesn't need a peer military [1:08:50] to cause serious problems. [1:08:53] His playbook, the cheap drones built from commercial parts, [1:08:58] sea mines in contested straits, [1:09:02] fast attack craft and anti-ship missiles. [1:09:06] The war also confirmed a harder lesson. [1:09:11] Even with overwhelming firepower, [1:09:14] the side that runs out of munitions [1:09:17] or air defenses first loses. [1:09:21] Are we, Mr. Secretary, are we secure in that point? [1:09:28] Absolutely. [1:09:32] And we are winning, have won every component [1:09:37] of what we've fought in this conflict. [1:09:39] Iran knows that based on the incredible degradation [1:09:42] of their capabilities, [1:09:43] which is why we saw them wanting to come to the table. [1:09:46] How this gets resolved will be on our terms, [1:09:49] on President Trump's terms, [1:09:50] and we have all the munitions and capabilities [1:09:52] necessary to enable that. [1:09:55] Thank you. [1:09:56] You'll be. [1:09:57] Thank you, gentlemen. [1:09:58] Mr. Aguilar. [1:09:59] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:10:00] Thank you all for being here. [1:10:04] Mr. Hurst, on April 29th, [1:10:06] as you indicated to the ranking member, [1:10:08] you said that the Iran war had cost $25 billion in total. [1:10:12] You reaffirmed that today. [1:10:13] Do you have any other updated costs [1:10:17] or projections since that testimony that you've given? [1:10:22] Outside reporting estimates have indicated [1:10:25] that the war costs could be $1 billion a day. [1:10:27] Do you have anything to share? [1:10:31] Yeah, thanks for the question, sir. [1:10:32] So at the time of testimony in front of the ask, [1:10:34] it was $25 billion. [1:10:36] But the Joint Staff team and the Comptroller team [1:10:38] are constantly looking at that estimate. [1:10:40] And so now we think it's closer to 29. [1:10:43] That's because of updated repair [1:10:45] and replacement of equipment costs, [1:10:47] and also just general operational costs [1:10:49] to keep people in theater. [1:10:51] Thank you. [1:10:52] I appreciate that. [1:10:53] Mr. Secretary, when can you share more formal accounting [1:10:56] on the cost of the war with Congress [1:10:59] and with this committee? [1:11:02] We'll share what we can. [1:11:04] I think we've updated on that number this morning. [1:11:06] But when it's relevant and required, we will share it. [1:11:12] I think this would be the format that it would be required. [1:11:17] Mr. Secretary, on that same day, April 29th, [1:11:21] you testified that the current ceasefire meant that the 60-day [1:11:24] calendar with the War Powers Resolution was paused. [1:11:29] Who are the parties to the ceasefire? [1:11:34] Right now, we are in that same ceasefire as of right now. [1:11:37] That wasn't the question. [1:11:38] Who are the parties to the ceasefire? [1:11:39] It would be the United States and the regime in Iran. [1:11:43] Who, how many pages is the ceasefire? [1:11:49] What deal points? [1:11:50] I'm not asking you to share the contents. [1:11:51] I guess what I'm trying to ask is, [1:11:54] how do we know that the ceasefire is active or not active [1:12:00] without any documentation? [1:12:04] We know it's evident, and the ceasefire is in effect. [1:12:09] But is it, is it pages? [1:12:12] Is it, is it 15 points? [1:12:13] There's been different points that have moved around. [1:12:18] You know, is there any other, [1:12:20] how do we know you just trust that the president knows [1:12:23] that the ceasefire is active or not active? [1:12:26] As you know, for the most part, [1:12:27] a ceasefire means the fire is ceasing, [1:12:29] and we know that has occurred while negotiations occur. [1:12:32] And there are lots of different discussions [1:12:35] with our negotiating team that are happening. [1:12:36] I'm there when those discussions are occurring. [1:12:39] Different drafts, different perspectives. [1:12:41] So it's a very dynamic situation [1:12:43] where a negotiated settlement could be the outcome here, [1:12:46] where Iran does not have nuclear capabilities. [1:12:49] And from the Department of War perspective, [1:12:51] we, we're here to support those options. [1:12:54] On May 5th, you announced the launch of Project Freedom, [1:12:57] which is a new exercise where CENTCOM [1:12:59] will help coordinate ship traffic [1:13:01] and guide commercial ships through the strait. [1:13:03] President Trump then announced [1:13:04] the operation concluded that evening. [1:13:07] Now it seems that the, we may be revisiting that. [1:13:11] Can you give us the latest on Project Freedom? [1:13:15] Well, as it pertains to battlefield options, [1:13:18] we're not, we don't disclose those types of things, [1:13:20] but ultimately at the, as the president stated publicly [1:13:24] in his truth, at the request of the Pakistanis [1:13:26] and given the options in the negotiation, it was paused [1:13:29] and it's an option we could always recommence [1:13:31] should the commander in chief want us to. [1:13:33] Is the, is the theory to create more ceasefires [1:13:36] or more projects just to evade the War Powers Act? [1:13:40] The theory of the entire case is to prevent Iran [1:13:45] from having a nuclear weapon. [1:13:47] And if that has to be done kinetically and militarily, [1:13:49] the Department of War is locked and loaded [1:13:51] and ready to do that. [1:13:52] If it happens through Project Freedom [1:13:55] where you move commerce through, [1:13:56] it has to, if it happens through a negotiated deal, [1:13:59] the president was very clear even yesterday. [1:14:01] This is actually quite simple. [1:14:02] Iran will never have a nuclear weapon one way or another. [1:14:05] And we're here to support as one tool [1:14:07] of the whole of government to make that happen. [1:14:11] General Kane, the depleted munitions have been a subject [1:14:16] of some of the discussions that you've even heard here today. [1:14:20] With respect to stockpiles that we have around the world, [1:14:24] that we have around the world and that we have around the world. [1:14:29] You know, can you give us an update? [1:14:31] What other, what are you hearing from the combatant commands [1:14:34] about their munitions status around the world? [1:14:42] Well, sir, we, we, we have sufficient munitions [1:14:45] for what we're tasked to do right now. [1:14:48] That's what I hear from the COCOMs. [1:14:49] What I will say is I will always want more. [1:14:52] So I appreciate the effort of this committee and the Congress. [1:14:56] We're always going to want more munitions. [1:15:00] Secretary Haigstead, what are you doing to support [1:15:02] the involved services to, to recap their losses? [1:15:08] We're submitting a $1.5 trillion budget [1:15:10] that'll remake the department and ensure [1:15:11] that every warfighter in the future has exactly what they need [1:15:14] and we're never in a fair fight. [1:15:15] And I, I take issue with the characterization [1:15:17] that munitions are depleted in a public forum. [1:15:20] That's not true. [1:15:21] And ultimately we have all the munitions needed [1:15:23] to execute what we need to execute. [1:15:24] And we're going to ensure that we supercharge [1:15:26] that going into the future. [1:15:27] I think you've heard differences [1:15:28] from both sides of the aisle on that point. [1:15:30] Yield back, Mr. Chairman. [1:15:31] Thank you, gentlemen. [1:15:32] Judge Carter. [1:15:36] Thank you, Mr. Chairman, [1:15:37] and welcome to each of you. [1:15:39] I'm glad you're here. [1:15:45] Start off with something I'm concerned about. [1:15:49] Mr. Secretary, my MILCON VA subcommittee [1:15:53] is aware of living conditions of the 68 W combat medic students [1:16:01] at the Joint Base San Antonio. [1:16:03] Frankly, they're very unacceptable and quite unlivable. [1:16:09] As chairman of the MILCON committee, [1:16:11] I'm deeply concerned there appears to be no imminent path forward [1:16:17] to fix these issues. [1:16:19] What actions is the department taking [1:16:22] to improve these living conditions, [1:16:25] ensure our soldiers receive safe and dignified housing now [1:16:31] and not in the years to come. [1:16:34] Our budget cannot fix that. [1:16:37] It's not that we don't have enough money. [1:16:40] You've got all the money. [1:16:42] What do you think about that? [1:16:44] First of all, let's fix that. [1:16:46] Whatever unit that is, we want to know about it, [1:16:48] and we're going to get a team out there right away to address it. [1:16:50] And we've used discreet examples like that to find the gaps [1:16:53] in why we're not getting at it at a more holistic fashion. [1:16:56] Because we came in on a huge deficit of maintenance [1:17:00] on barracks and housing. [1:17:02] This budget funds that. [1:17:05] We're also going to pursue MILCON reform, [1:17:07] because in too many places, we're trying to build things [1:17:10] around MILCON as opposed to using MILCON, [1:17:12] because MILCON is so bureaucratic and slow in its process. [1:17:16] So we look forward to working with you to fix that, [1:17:19] not just this discreet barracks issue, [1:17:21] but where we found them, we fixed it, [1:17:23] and then we've energized the system through a barracks task force [1:17:26] to flow money exactly where it needs to go. [1:17:29] And I'm a champion of speeding up MILCON everywhere we can. [1:17:35] And we are, I've been out to Guam and some of those places, [1:17:42] and we got a lot of needs out that way. [1:17:44] I mean, we're way beyond what our budget will sustain. [1:17:50] But I have another question for you. [1:17:52] I represent Fort Hood, the home of the 1st Air Cavalry Division Brigade, [1:18:01] operating Apaches, Blackhawks, and Chinook helicopters. [1:18:07] I'm concerned that the FY27 budget request does not support these programs, [1:18:14] essentially zeroing out funding across the three platforms, [1:18:19] despite the Army stating that we're going to use these aircraft [1:18:24] and they will operate for decades to come. [1:18:28] With that, the Chinook has no replacement for heavy lift mission. [1:18:34] Now, will the Department manage aviation modernization, [1:18:39] and how will they do that without creating readiness problems [1:18:45] and capability gaps in the future? [1:18:48] What's the plan future lift is not like the Chinook? [1:18:56] Sir, I think it's a very fair point. [1:18:57] I think it goes to the previous mindset of divest to invest. [1:19:01] That was an austerity point of view that we inherited at our department. [1:19:05] We've made some changes at the Army. [1:19:06] We might have a slightly different view of the Army Transformation Initiative. [1:19:10] Some of it is very good. [1:19:11] There's a lot of goodness in there. [1:19:12] But I think there are some things that assumed future platforms [1:19:16] that may not be there yet. [1:19:17] Take the Apache, for example, which our warfighters rely on and love. [1:19:22] Take the Chinook, which is used all the time. [1:19:25] We need to make sure we've got something there for it [1:19:27] before you divest or we're not investing in that capability. [1:19:30] So we look forward to reviewing that with you [1:19:32] and ensuring that we don't have a gap. [1:19:34] You know, because the budget doesn't have anything. [1:19:36] It zeroes out all three of those as far as we read it. [1:19:42] Well, then I'd like to take I'll take another look at that with our team. [1:19:46] Okay. [1:19:47] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:19:52] Thank you, gentlemen. [1:19:53] Mr. Case. [1:19:55] Thank you, Chair. [1:19:56] Mr. Hurst, what is the total replacement cost of the material [1:20:01] that we have expended in Iran to date? [1:20:07] By the way, by material, I refer to munitions. [1:20:10] I refer to, you know, planes, to drones, [1:20:13] to stuff that we keep in our stockpile. [1:20:16] Yeah, I'll exclude military construction from this [1:20:19] because we don't know what that's going to look like in the future. [1:20:21] But I would say it's around $24 billion for replacement and repair. [1:20:26] And that's through what date? [1:20:29] That's our current estimate. [1:20:30] Okay. [1:20:32] I'm looking at a report in the public sphere from CSIS dated April 21st, [1:20:38] which calculates estimated cost, unit cost, [1:20:44] aggregate unit cost of seven precision systems. [1:20:49] So I'm talking, you know, Tomahawk, JASM, PRISM, SM3, SM6, THAAD, [1:20:54] Patriot, those seven at about $25 billion. [1:20:59] Is that, does that sound about right? [1:21:01] I mean, you're, you're projecting everything at about 23. [1:21:06] Yeah, I'm most confident in our projections on munitions cost. [1:21:09] That's the easiest thing to calculate. [1:21:11] So that number sounds a little high to me for that stage of the war. [1:21:14] Okay. [1:21:16] We've lost about 39 aircraft, according to a report in the war zone. [1:21:20] And that's an old one that's almost one month old. [1:21:23] Do you have a replacement cost on all those aircraft? [1:21:26] Now, understanding that some of that aircraft is not replaceable, [1:21:29] but presumably you would have to replace it with some kind of capacity. [1:21:32] There are costs there, sir, but I want to get back to you in writing [1:21:36] and what they specifically are, because as you can imagine, [1:21:39] repair of aircraft is something that's very hard to calculate. [1:21:42] We want to do a full diagnosis of the aircraft before we estimate that cost. [1:21:45] Okay. [1:21:46] But that's not in your estimate of somewhere around 29 cost of war that you, [1:21:51] that you gave us. [1:21:51] That's included. [1:21:52] That's what we have right now. [1:21:53] Oh, I see. [1:21:54] That is part of it. [1:21:55] Yeah, but it's an estimate, especially for repair costs. [1:21:57] And so that could change over time. [1:21:58] Okay. [1:21:59] And you did talk about MILCON, which was a question that I had. [1:22:02] Do you have any, because we've obviously suffered major damage [1:22:06] to our infrastructure in the Middle East. [1:22:08] Do you have, you don't have a MILCON estimate yet? [1:22:12] We have a lot of unknowns there. [1:22:13] We don't know what our future posture is going to be. [1:22:15] We don't know how we construct those bases. [1:22:16] And we don't know what part our allies or partners could pay [1:22:18] into the MILCON cost. [1:22:20] And so we don't have a good estimate for that at the time. [1:22:22] Okay. [1:22:23] What about fuel? [1:22:24] Is that a major calculation in your cost of war fuel used, [1:22:29] depletion of fuel reserves, replenishing that reserve? [1:22:33] We wrap that into our operations and maintenance costs. [1:22:37] Okay, that's a no I meant. [1:22:39] Okay. [1:22:40] Going to your FY26 budget request, you've got procurement. [1:22:47] Let's just focus on procurement, because that's what we're talking [1:22:49] about largely. [1:22:50] You've got $413 billion, which in and of itself is an 84% increase [1:22:55] over FY20, I'm sorry, I'm in 27, 27 versus 26. [1:23:04] And you have 38% of that total procurement request in reconciliation. [1:23:11] Does that reconciliation request include anything from the war in Iran? [1:23:19] Obviously, we're buying things in the reconciliation requests that are being [1:23:23] used in the Iran conflict, including munitions. [1:23:26] There's over $40 billion in a munitions request and reconciliation. [1:23:29] And so that would be part of the replacement. [1:23:33] Okay. [1:23:34] So what I'm trying to get at is, is your reconciliation request in FY27 [1:23:37] related to Iran, or is it not related to Iran? [1:23:40] You know how long our budget generation process is and the appropriation cycle. [1:23:47] Correct. [1:23:48] And so we completed this before the Iran conflict. [1:23:49] Exactly. [1:23:50] Okay. [1:23:51] So what you're coming back to us with is not the, I mean, the reconciliation [1:23:55] is not about Iran. [1:23:56] The reconciliation is about assumptions that were made before Iran. [1:24:01] It's about making a generational investment of the joint force and building [1:24:04] military readiness. [1:24:05] That's what a budget request is. [1:24:07] Okay. [1:24:08] I'm going to get back to some of the questions that were asked [1:24:12] earlier, which is, what is the assumption that you are making in terms of future [1:24:20] reconciliation bills in future fiscal years? [1:24:23] How much of this is loaded into this particular fiscal year? [1:24:26] You had a big reconciliation last year, which was portrayed in the same light, and now you're [1:24:31] coming back for a huge one this year. [1:24:34] Is another one on the horizon next year then? [1:24:37] For our budget request for 28, we expect a request that is discretionary only. [1:24:42] And I believe the top line for that is 1.23, which will be our request that year. [1:24:47] Okay. [1:24:48] I yield back. [1:24:51] Thanks, gentlemen. [1:24:52] Mr. Diaz-Bowler. [1:24:55] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:24:56] Thank you, gentlemen. [1:24:57] And more importantly, the folks that you lead. [1:24:59] The federal government does a lot of important things, but nothing more important than what [1:25:04] you all deal with. [1:25:06] Let me get back to this hemisphere. [1:25:08] I'm very, very grateful that the administration is finally really focused on the western hemisphere, [1:25:13] and it's actually going to show, we're going to be able to show that it's saving American [1:25:17] lives. [1:25:18] But let me just, to you, Mr. Secretary, let me throw a couple of points and see if you disagree [1:25:23] with any of these. [1:25:24] And let me talk about the one-state-sponsored terrorism in the western hemisphere, which [1:25:29] is the Cuban regime. [1:25:32] Are you aware that they harbor terrorists and fugitives from U.S. law? [1:25:37] And we can just go through these really quick. [1:25:39] Yes. [1:25:40] Is it true that the Cuban regime actually shot down two American airplanes in international [1:25:46] airspace, murdering Americans? [1:25:47] I don't, I can't recall the precise year, but I believe that is the case. [1:25:52] Is it true that Russian spy ships and warships, including the nuclear sub-Kazan, have repeatedly [1:26:00] used Cuban ports? [1:26:03] That is true, Congressman. [1:26:04] Is it true that the site of the Russian signet complex in Lourdes has once again become a hub [1:26:11] for Russian intelligence within Cuba? [1:26:13] Well, we've long been concerned that a foreign adversary using that kind of location that [1:26:18] close to our shores is highly problematic, yes. [1:26:21] And is it also true that now the Chinese also are there? [1:26:25] I wouldn't want to reveal anything that should be classified, but we don't want foreign adversaries [1:26:30] attempting to use that island. [1:26:32] Well stated. [1:26:34] Are you aware that, well, you're obviously aware that Cubans' intel people and military [1:26:40] folks have been sent around the world because your folks confronted them in Venezuela? [1:26:47] But are you also aware that according to Ukrainian intelligence, there are thousands of Cubans [1:26:51] fighting for Russia and Ukraine? [1:26:53] I was not aware of that particular fact, but I am well aware that Cubans have been around [1:27:00] the globe to include attempting to defend Maduro in Venezuela. [1:27:04] So that is something they've done for a long time, yes. [1:27:06] You're also aware, Mr. Secretary, that, well, even stated by U.S. intelligence, even during [1:27:12] the Biden administration, the Trump administration, the previous administration, the Obama administration, [1:27:17] that Cuba has been designated as one of the foremost advanced espionage operations against [1:27:23] the United States and that they share intel with other adversaries of the United States. [1:27:28] That all very much sounds right, sir. [1:27:31] And again, we're not in a classified setting. [1:27:33] So I'm just considering all those issues and others that we could talk about in a classified [1:27:37] setting. [1:27:39] Do you believe that the Cuban regime possesses a national security threat to the United States? [1:27:44] I do. [1:27:48] Let me now focus on Iran, as I have a little bit of time left over here. [1:27:52] You, Mr. Secretary, you've been very clear what the goal is, but the goal that you're saying [1:27:58] is not the goal that just this administration has had vis-a-vis Iran. [1:28:02] It's been the goal of multiple presidents of the United States, right? [1:28:05] Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. [1:28:09] But I'd like to also ask you about Iran's offensive ballistic missiles and their offensive [1:28:14] drones and their use of terrorism. [1:28:17] Are those also issues that would be factors in a negotiated settlement with Iran? [1:28:27] Because I don't have to tell you, there have been negotiations ad nauseum with Iran. [1:28:31] The Iranians continue to cut deals, and yet they violate those deals. [1:28:36] But it's interesting, in the nuclear deal that was cut with Iran during the Obama administration, [1:28:45] missiles weren't even in part of that deal. [1:28:47] As horrible as the deal was dealing with the nuclear issue, nor was terrorism. [1:28:52] And I'm just hoping that those two issues, not only the nuclear deal, which is paramount, [1:28:57] but offensive ballistic weapons, missiles, and we saw one that now has the capability of [1:29:03] traveling rather far, and also their spread of terrorism, I hope that those also would [1:29:10] be factors in any resolution to this issue in Iran, with Iran. [1:29:15] Well, sir, we're not the negotiating team, but I can tell you we have world-class negotiators. [1:29:20] The core of it is the nuclear weapons issue. [1:29:24] Those other factors are always a factor. [1:29:27] Understanding that Iran has effectively tried to use the North Korea strategy with such overwhelming [1:29:32] capabilities conventionally that no one would dare prevent them from pursuing a nuclear weapon, [1:29:37] and it took President Trump to have the courage to make that historic decision. [1:29:41] And hopefully we can get that across the finish line with negotiations, which are ongoing [1:29:45] right now. [1:29:46] Mr. Chairman, my time is up. [1:29:47] I yield back. [1:29:48] Thank you, sir. [1:29:50] Thank you, gentlemen. [1:29:51] Ms. Lee. [1:29:52] Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Secretary, Undersecretary in general, thank you for being here. [1:29:59] Secretary Hegseth, about 11 years ago, U.S. Air Force veteran Sergeant David Crete, who served [1:30:06] at the Nevada Test and Training Range, realized for the first time that the health problems he'd been [1:30:12] experiencing were not an isolated incident, but matched the health problems of many other [1:30:18] veterans who had served alongside him at Knitter. [1:30:22] He was sitting in his backyard reconnecting with eight of them and asked them, does anyone [1:30:28] here have tumors? [1:30:30] And six of eight of them rose their hands and then proclaimed that even some of them had children [1:30:36] with tumors. [1:30:37] Dave, as it happens, had recently had a grape-sized tumor removed from his neck. [1:30:44] Three years ago, he came to Washington when the VA had refused to provide him the kind of [1:30:50] benefits and coverage he had earned and which he needs from the VA because of his Department [1:30:56] of Defense would not provide the agency with his records of his Knitter service. [1:31:03] I helped introduce a bill two years ago and have been fighting on his behalf ever since. [1:31:12] What is most frustrating about this fight is not that the federal government doesn't recognize [1:31:18] these health impacts of their service. [1:31:20] In fact, Congress, 26 years ago, provided a law providing medical coverage and compensation [1:31:27] for the Department of Energy employees who served in the very same location that Dave Crete and [1:31:34] his colleagues had served in. [1:31:36] Instead, their fight is against the Department of Defense red tape, which you have been committed [1:31:43] to fighting. [1:31:44] Thank you. [1:31:45] You see, one of the only things standing between the toxic exposed veterans at Knitter and comprehensive [1:31:52] health coverage and benefits from the VA is documentation that the Department of Defense has that will [1:32:01] prove that they served where they actually did. [1:32:04] This documentation exists, and we're just waiting for the Department to act. [1:32:11] Every day that you delay in providing this information, another veteran and their family suffers unnecessarily. [1:32:20] Last week, I had the opportunity to meet many of these veterans. [1:32:24] Two hours before I met them, one of them received a call from his oncologist informing him that [1:32:31] he had multiple myeloma, an uncurable blood cancer. [1:32:36] Over the weekend, Dave was notified that two more of his cohort had recent deaths. [1:32:44] The Invisible Enemy, which is an organization Dave founded, maintains a memorial list of those [1:32:49] who worked at Knitter and have passed away. [1:32:52] When Dave testified before the House Veterans Affairs Committee roundtable 13 months ago, 462 [1:33:01] veterans were on this list. [1:33:03] Today, that list includes 565 names. [1:33:09] Just one year of inaction has led to 103 veterans passing without the care that they earned and [1:33:19] their family without the benefits. [1:33:22] This list grows by an average of one every two days. [1:33:26] Mr. Secretary, you have the authority to provide the VA with the documents they need today to get [1:33:35] these veterans the help they need. [1:33:38] These veterans have been waiting far too long. [1:33:41] Can you please commit to me that you will be able to provide that list or that information [1:33:47] as soon as possible so that these veterans can get the care and the benefits that they [1:33:53] have rightfully earned? [1:33:55] Well, thank you for what you're doing for those folks. [1:33:59] And I can certainly commit to you today that, you know, my chief's right here. [1:34:03] He will get a review for me as soon as early as next week, and I'll get back to you on what [1:34:08] our department's position should be on that. [1:34:11] Okay. [1:34:12] Well, first of all, we have the information. [1:34:17] The Department of Energy has provided these benefits to the same cohort of people worked [1:34:23] alongside them. [1:34:26] We cannot wait for another review. [1:34:28] I'm asking for your commitment. [1:34:29] I'm not talking about a full review. [1:34:30] I'm just talking about a familiarization so I understand exactly what you're talking about, [1:34:34] wrap my arms around it, and then get you a response. [1:34:37] It's not a situation I have all the facts on. [1:34:39] Okay. [1:34:40] I just want to get all the facts and understand it before I commit to something like that. [1:34:42] All right. [1:34:43] I just, like I said, one person every two days, one veteran who has served this country is [1:34:51] dying and their families are going without the benefits they've earned. [1:34:55] I can't express how urgent this need is. [1:34:59] I thank you for your immediate attention to this issue. [1:35:03] Thanks, gentlelady. [1:35:05] Mr. Elsie. [1:35:07] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:35:08] Mr. Secretary, General Cain, Jay, thank you all for being here, to all the staff sitting [1:35:13] uncomfortably in very tight seats behind him. [1:35:16] Thanks for your dedication to our country. [1:35:17] Master Chief Isom, you joined the Navy in 1987. [1:35:21] Ronald Reagan was still president. [1:35:23] You've been in uniform for 39 years. [1:35:25] I'd like to thank you and your family for all the sacrifices that you've made. [1:35:30] You're clearly the essential man, and I always want to point that out, that you've been serving [1:35:36] in the Navy since I was a junior in high school, and so I'm very, very grateful. [1:35:42] As we address $1.5 trillion requests, I want to say I appreciate participating in the tabletop [1:35:47] exercise at the Pentagon, and I encourage all my colleagues to attend and do that. [1:35:52] It gives a very clear message on why we're asking or you are asking for $1.5 trillion [1:35:59] and how it's justified. [1:36:02] As we move forward with contested logistics and as eventually this war in Iran will end [1:36:07] and the Indo-PACOM becomes the focus again, I'd like to see Congress fully fund a request [1:36:13] for the Marine Corps McClung-class LSM and the KC-130J for both the Navy and the Marine Corps. [1:36:19] But the budget request breaks them up, and I'm not sure how you skin that cat. [1:36:24] Moving to force protection and counter UAS, as we've seen in Iran at nations that are [1:36:29] somewhat far away from Iran, we've had a force protection and counter UAS issue as we've [1:36:34] lost an E3 AWACS, which is worth $500 million when we bought it, but it's irreplaceable and [1:36:42] there are fewer of those than B-21s. [1:36:44] I think we're seeing the reach of UASs affect us in a way that we probably didn't anticipate, [1:36:53] and we need to continue to use new companies that are developing new technologies to go [1:37:00] after UASs. [1:37:01] General, you addressed Carl von Clausewitz, so I'll use Sun Tzu as a counter. [1:37:08] Even the finest sword plunged into saltwater will eventually rust. [1:37:12] And we deployed the USS Ford in June 24th of 2025. [1:37:17] It's going on 11 months at sea. [1:37:20] And as one of only two people in the room who have been on extended deployments on ships, [1:37:24] myself and Master Chief Isom, I just want to point out thanks to the families who are sacrificing, [1:37:29] this is going to harm a lot of families. [1:37:33] And as we realize that every conflict we've been in in the last year has included the Ford, [1:37:39] and it's been essential to our operations. [1:37:41] It also points out the need for carriers, and I don't think 11 is enough, but also recognize [1:37:46] that downrange, that's going to affect the availability and the readiness of our force [1:37:52] going forward. [1:37:54] So along with that, the capabilities that a sixth generation fighter on the carrier are [1:37:59] so important. [1:38:00] As we've already seen, we've got the F-47, we're going to down-select the F-A-X-X later [1:38:04] this summer. [1:38:05] General Cain, can you address why having both of those is so important? [1:38:08] Well, first, sir, I want to echo your gratitude for the Ford. [1:38:15] Yesterday, the air wing flew off. [1:38:18] So we know that Oceana was a very happy place as those aviators fought through 800 feet broken [1:38:26] to come up initial as they should after a record-setting deployment. [1:38:30] So we welcome the Ford back. [1:38:31] You know, my job, I won't comment on a particular program, but the job that I'm in now is to [1:38:37] offer a range of options to include our ability to project power off CVNs of the future. [1:38:43] So as our civilian leadership carefully considers that, I know that will be in the mix if selected. [1:38:49] And I know your colleagues in Virginia and in San Diego are all focused on the same, sir. [1:38:54] They're going to have similar capabilities, but I think as we switch to the Indo-PACOM region [1:39:04] that as we talk about first, second, third island chains, which for most of the American [1:39:08] people doesn't really mean that much, but the ability to have a moving airfield in the Indo-PACOM [1:39:15] area, which is very important to recognize that a moving aircraft carrier with unique capabilities, [1:39:35] which obviously can't be addressed in a place like this, that can shoot from outside the [1:39:40] range of the capabilities of our adversaries is extremely important. [1:39:45] I appreciate everything that y'all are doing. [1:39:47] You're addressing an issue that hasn't been addressed in decades by asking for 1.5 trillion. [1:39:54] It's a hard ask. [1:39:55] It's going to be difficult for us to sell it, but I think it's absolutely essential for the [1:39:58] defense of the United States, including a supplemental, which even people on my side of the aisle are [1:40:04] saying they won't support. [1:40:06] This is merely to refurbish and replenish that which we have expended in this conflict. [1:40:11] It's absolutely essential for the defense of the United States and the Chinese are watching. [1:40:14] So thank you for all three of you and everybody in the room that works in this department. [1:40:19] Thank you for what you do. [1:40:20] I yield back. [1:40:21] Thank you, gentlemen. [1:40:22] Mr. Morelli. [1:40:25] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:40:26] I appreciate this hearing and thank you all for being here and for testifying. [1:40:31] I just wanted to make a general observation, first of all. [1:40:34] I do get the sense that sometimes people think that critical questions are unpatriotic, weak [1:40:41] or defeatist. [1:40:42] I just want to say for the record, I don't think that's the truth. [1:40:45] I think it's the opposite. [1:40:46] And I appreciate, General Cain, you've mentioned civilian leadership and civilian control a number [1:40:51] of times in your testimony this morning. [1:40:53] We're the Congress. [1:40:55] Civilian control that you have talked about begins and ends here. [1:40:59] And that's the way the founders put in Article 1 responsibility for funding and for declarations [1:41:04] of war with the United States Congress. [1:41:07] So I want to just mention that because I hear it all the time. [1:41:10] And we are not in any way, when we ask critical questions, demeaning or in any way reducing [1:41:16] our tremendous respect for the men and women of the military, the joint forces of the United [1:41:20] States. [1:41:21] So I feel like that needs to be said. [1:41:23] And I appreciate the comments that you made, General Cain, about civilian control. [1:41:28] Second, as it relates to mandatory spending versus discretionary, I think this is really [1:41:32] important. [1:41:33] This committee, the Appropriations Committee and the Defense Subcommittee is given the responsibility [1:41:39] by the Congress and by the American people to make sure that we have an appreciation for [1:41:43] all the dollars, taxpayer dollars, that go into defending this nation. [1:41:48] And questions, again, ought to be here. [1:41:51] Transparency begins here. [1:41:53] Oversight begins here. [1:41:55] And mandatory spending avoids the responsibility this committee has to report to the American [1:41:59] people on how our money is being spent. [1:42:01] So I just, again, want to stress how important it is. [1:42:06] I appreciate my friend Mr. Elsie's comments about the $1.5 trillion request. [1:42:11] If it is so obvious to everyone and to the American people that that's the dollar amount [1:42:14] we need, we ought not be going through this mandatory, discretionary, supplemental, let's [1:42:20] put it all on the table and let's make the case to the American people. [1:42:24] You know, we've now waited since February 28th is, by my count, 11 weeks, 74 days since hostilities [1:42:33] began in Iran. [1:42:34] And trying to get a reporting of the dollars that have been spent in this has been excruciating [1:42:41] and it's been long. [1:42:42] And I would, just in the strongest terms, urge that we move forward and give this committee [1:42:56] a full reporting on what the cost of this endeavor has been. [1:42:59] With that, I didn't want to make a quick, you mentioned something, Mr. Secretary, in your [1:43:07] opening comments about private companies making private investments in our defense. [1:43:11] I assume they're getting compensated for investment. [1:43:13] When you say private investment, are you suggesting companies are making investments for which they [1:43:17] will not be compensated? [1:43:18] Yes, I am. [1:43:20] Why would they do that? [1:43:22] Because we're turning it, it's the right question. [1:43:26] Because we've done it one way for years and years and gotten the same results. [1:43:30] So this is changing the paradigm. [1:43:33] Companies now know we're going to give them orders for five to seven years on exclusive [1:43:36] munitions in exchange for them paying for capitalization of their own plants. [1:43:41] We used to pay for them to build their plants and then buy the munitions from them. [1:43:45] So now, because they know they got consistent income. [1:43:48] But they are. [1:43:49] No, I appreciate what you're saying. [1:43:50] They're up-fronting costs. [1:43:51] The crimes are now paying for their own plants and equipment. [1:43:55] That is a brand new paradigm. [1:43:57] The taxpayer's not paying for it. [1:43:58] That's $50 billion of value that you don't have to appropriate because the companies are [1:44:03] paying for it themselves. [1:44:04] And the companies will not get compensated. [1:44:06] They're going to make that as a charitable contribution to the United States government. [1:44:09] Their compensation is long lead times of munitions that they will produce and we will [1:44:14] pay for in the future. [1:44:15] But we don't have to build the factory. [1:44:16] Okay, all right. [1:44:17] Just to be clear. [1:44:18] This is how private business works. [1:44:19] Reclaiming my time. [1:44:20] They have to build their own factories. [1:44:21] I appreciate what you're saying, but let's not, I mean, let's be honest. [1:44:25] They're going to get compensated. [1:44:26] Look, I'm for that. [1:44:27] And I appreciate what you're saying in terms of lead time and dependability and reliability [1:44:32] of funding. [1:44:34] But let's be clear. [1:44:35] I want to switch topics if I can for a second. [1:44:40] There's been much reported about the president's trip to China. [1:44:43] And I appreciate, again, my colleagues who have raised Indo-PACOM and its defense. [1:44:49] There are weapons sales which have been on hold that the president has not authorized [1:44:53] to Taiwan. [1:44:54] And I wonder if you could give me an update, either Mr. Secretary or General Cain, on what [1:44:58] the status of those weapons sales are at this point. [1:45:01] I just want to say the primes will be paying for those factories out of their own pocket, [1:45:07] not the department's money or the taxpayers' money, which is a sea change, which is why [1:45:10] I think this budget is so historic. [1:45:11] They're going to get a return on their investment, which, by the way, this is America. [1:45:14] Which we welcome. [1:45:15] They welcome a return on investment. [1:45:16] Yes, I understand, but they're not paying for it out of their pocket and not getting [1:45:19] compensated. [1:45:20] But anyway, could you answer my question about Taiwan? [1:45:22] Buildings cost money. [1:45:23] And if we're giving them $2 billion to build the factory, that's taxpayer money. [1:45:28] If they're using it out of their own hide, that's $2 billion saved for the American people [1:45:32] that then we can appropriate toward munitions that we pay for in the future. [1:45:36] I know it's difficult to grasp. [1:45:37] It's not difficult to grasp, sir. [1:45:39] It's a different way of getting to the same place. [1:45:43] You're going to pay for it. [1:45:44] And look, we ought to. [1:45:46] They're building things for us, but to suggest that somehow they're making an investment [1:45:49] that they're not going to get compensated through sales is just, it's honestly kind [1:45:54] of ridiculous. [1:45:55] We used to pay for the building, too, and then pay for the sales. [1:45:57] And now we're paying for the sales, but not the building, which I think is a good- [1:46:01] And they're not embedding that in the price of the things that they're selling to us. [1:46:04] The capitalization, the capex that they're putting into it, they're going to get back. [1:46:08] Look, I don't know why we're even arguing about it. [1:46:10] They're paying for it. [1:46:11] Could you answer my question about Taiwan? [1:46:13] Well, that's the president's on the cusp of a trip, and I'll be with him, and he will [1:46:16] make all the decisions related to that. [1:46:18] Thank you, gentlemen, Mr. Spire. [1:46:22] Make a quick point. [1:46:23] There is a change. [1:46:25] The industrial base is putting money at risk with the expectation of orders, but there [1:46:31] is no guarantee if, in fact, that that particular product that they may make is not met or meet [1:46:39] the standards in which we want to acquire it. [1:46:42] And that is a significant change in what we've done in the past. [1:46:45] Mr. Fleischman. [1:46:47] Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Secretary. [1:46:49] I commend those changes in the innovation. [1:46:51] To everyone on this panel, thank you for a job well done. [1:46:55] Thank you for what you're doing for our country. [1:46:57] This is truly incredible. [1:46:59] So let me start with that. [1:47:01] As chairman of the Energy and Water Subcommittee, I'm going to take a little bit different approach. [1:47:07] I'm deeply involved in the recapitalization and modernization of our nation's nuclear deterrent. [1:47:13] As we are recapitalizing the entire strategic nuclear arsenal, I remain concerned about the [1:47:19] lack of options lower on the escalation ladder available to the president. [1:47:23] In theater, non-strategic nuclear weapons have remained essential to the credibility of our extended deterrent commitment to NATO. [1:47:30] I've got a couple of questions to ask, but I'm going to ask General Cain and Secretary Hegseth. [1:47:37] What is your assessment of our non-strategic nuclear capability gaps in the Indo-Pacific and elsewhere? [1:47:43] What additional tactical nuclear capabilities beyond SLICM-N should we consider that would be most useful for reassuring allies, [1:47:51] deterring our adversaries, and providing combatant commands and usual options in the worst-case event of a conflict? [1:48:00] As you know, we're making a $2 billion investment, and you mentioned SLICM-N in FY26, so we're investing in that. [1:48:10] But I would say that a lot of that discussion would be classified given O plans in the Indo-Pacific. [1:48:17] But Admiral Paparo, I would say there's no COCOM commander we have regular feedback with on what dilemmas we might need to create for an [1:48:25] adversary than Admiral Paparo and Indo-Pacific to include everything that would deter any level of aggression. [1:48:32] So I think there's a lot of sensitivity on this topic that doesn't lend itself to this environment, but very much so we're looking at all options. [1:48:39] Thank you, and I would also commend the Admiral Paparo. I mean, they're doing incredible work. Yes, sir. General? [1:48:45] Sir, I was just acknowledging the Secretary's comment about what forum we're in here today. [1:48:52] You know, all three, and I appreciate the Congress's leadership, all three legs of the triad are undergoing modernization, [1:48:59] and all require that, and we're grateful for the assistance from the Congress. [1:49:05] It's a bedrock to deterrence around the world and one that we want to maintain our focus on. [1:49:11] I'll probably leave it at that and can come back if there's follow-up questions. [1:49:14] Thank you, and I would assure you, gentlemen, that in the Energen Water Bill, which funds this, we will certainly address it in a very robust way, [1:49:21] as I think the administration has, so I thank you all. [1:49:24] As most of you know, in that bill, I'm probably the nation's strongest proponent supporter of nuclear power in Congress. [1:49:34] Nuclear propulsion has long provided a great United States Navy with significant operational advantages. [1:49:40] There's been tremendous progress within your department accelerating the adoption of nuclear energy [1:49:47] as a means of providing resilient and long-duration power generation for military installations and forward operations. [1:49:54] I'm excited about the Army's Janus program, and the Air Force just announced the first two air bases to receive micro-reactors. [1:50:02] My question, gentlemen, is can you walk us through how the department is thinking about the role of nuclear power across the joint force, [1:50:10] including naval propulsion and the use of advanced reactors for base and expeditionary power? [1:50:17] What operational advantage did you see these technologies providing, particularly in the Indo-Pacific, [1:50:22] and what can we be doing to accelerate and expand these efforts? [1:50:26] Both incredibly important capabilities, micro-reactors and propulsion, [1:50:33] whether you're looking at survivability, sustainability of basing and mobility within basing, [1:50:39] and the expectation in the homeland or abroad that the lights are on and we can operate, [1:50:44] even if it's a contested environment. [1:50:46] And then there's just no doubt that you can't beat nuclear propulsion, [1:50:50] especially as we've refined it over time. [1:50:52] So I appreciate your efforts, and I think in this department you'll find a friend in ensuring we maximize that. [1:50:57] Thank you, Mr. Secretary. General? [1:51:00] Sir, I'll just say that the joint staff has collaborated and continues to do so with all the combatant commands [1:51:07] and services, the Secretary's team in office on OSW and the Congress, [1:51:12] to make sure that we're looking at the range of energy requirements that we're going to have [1:51:18] and that we move from, frankly, in some cases, a reactive posture, no reaction into your nuclear point, [1:51:25] but to a more proactive stance around how we're going to ensure energy sustainability [1:51:33] in a range of situations that we could face. [1:51:36] So we appreciate the chance to comment. [1:51:39] Thank you, General. [1:51:41] And again, once again, I begin with profound thanks. [1:51:43] I will end that way to all of y'all. [1:51:45] I yield back. [1:51:46] Thank you. [1:51:47] Thanks, gentlemen. [1:51:48] Mr. Joyce. [1:51:50] Thank you, Chairman. [1:51:52] Thank you all for being here in Defense, or yes, Defense Secretary, War Secretary, excuse me. [1:51:58] Hexeth, Godspeed on that project of changing our procurement process. [1:52:02] America's at its finest when capitalism and capital markets allow free competition [1:52:08] and you get to purchase the best of all those ideas out there. [1:52:11] Speaking of which, in June 2025, Ukraine's Operation Spiderweb, if you're familiar with it, [1:52:16] destroyed and damaged dozens of Russian aircraft on the ground using low-cost, covertly infiltrated drones [1:52:22] demonstrated military installations are vulnerable to asymmetric drone attacks at a fraction of conventional strike costs. [1:52:29] What steps is the Department taking to protect our military bases from covert drone attacks? [1:52:34] And do you need additional funding to safeguard those assets? [1:52:36] Well, I appreciate the question. [1:52:39] And it's the battlefield trend, well, one of a handful that we are most closely tracking and investing in. [1:52:47] $54 billion in defense autonomous warfare. [1:52:50] Recognition that every aspect of how we fight will be affected by technology and techniques and tactics like that one. [1:52:59] And every environment more contested than it's ever been. [1:53:03] And the ability to both go on offense and defense in that environment has to be something we're not just at parity with, [1:53:08] but ahead of adversaries to ensure that we can create the kind of advantages we're used to having. [1:53:15] And that's our job, is to ensure that we're looking around the corner. [1:53:18] And so this investment in this budget, I don't know what it was, Jay, in FY26, but it was a small fraction of $54 billion. [1:53:25] And we're even looking at DOG and metamorphosizing it, whether it's a joint task force into a subunified command. [1:53:32] We're elevating this so we can push it through the services and ensure that it's not just something we do in an exquisite way, [1:53:38] but it's how we fight at every echelon through the services. [1:53:41] And that budget number is a reflection of that. [1:53:44] Well, you're getting attacked on a lot of fronts, Secretary. [1:53:48] Can I just follow up? [1:53:51] Would that be okay? [1:53:52] Sure. [1:53:53] One thing that I appreciate the partnership with the Congress on is, as we evolve from the warfighting mix that we have right now, [1:54:02] the cost of precision and the cost of range is coming down. [1:54:07] And so as we look at this budget, we look at the mix of capabilities that we're going to have. [1:54:13] We talk about the agility in the defense industrial base and the national industrial base. [1:54:19] The flexibility that we as teammates are going to have to have to ensure that we're not buying behind the technology development curve, [1:54:27] but we're buying in front of it is something that we look in the joint force to partner with, obviously, OSW, [1:54:34] but also the Congress on this as technology moves really fast. [1:54:38] Thank you. [1:54:39] No problem, sir. [1:54:40] I just want to touch another angle that we're getting attacked at, unfortunately, [1:54:43] and that's the cyber threats from adversaries like China, Russia, Iran, and criminal organizations, which continue to grow. [1:54:49] The Department's ability to defend critical networks and support their military operations depends on a strong and ready cyber workforce [1:54:56] force across all the services. [1:54:58] At the same time, unfortunately, you're competing with the private sector, [1:55:01] which can make recruiting and retaining qualified cyber personnel challenging. [1:55:04] Can you give us an assessment of where the department's cyber workforce stands today [1:55:08] and what investments Congress can make to help you make that better? [1:55:13] Appreciate that question. [1:55:14] 20 billion in cyber offense and defense. [1:55:17] I think the biggest change we've made across the joint force is full integration of cyber as a warfighting domain, [1:55:22] which it was always an appendage or something you might do. [1:55:25] And I think when you look at operations, Epic Fury, Absolute Resolve with Maduro, the capabilities, [1:55:31] so much of that was enabled by unique cyber capabilities that we need to stay ahead on. [1:55:37] And so this recognizing future adversaries could have more capabilities and more sophistication, [1:55:42] both on offense and defense. [1:55:44] This funds it properly. [1:55:46] And I think we put a commander in charge there who's in General Rudd, [1:55:50] who is infusing a warfighting mindset into that place and ensuring we're competing not just inside the military, [1:55:56] but also for the best civilian talent to come into cyber comm as well. [1:56:00] Quite important. [1:56:01] And Secretary, I hate to keep picking on you, but the collaborative combat aircraft program is one of the department's most significant investments in this next generation autonomous power. [1:56:10] Can you discuss how the department is approaching the integration of these autonomous aircraft alongside crude platforms [1:56:16] and how the program fits in your broader effort to feel affordable mass and strengthen deterrence in the Indo-Pacific? [1:56:23] I can share some of it, but not all of it, because a lot of that is classified. [1:56:29] But it is part of the future of how we will fight and a way in which we plan to stay far ahead of adversaries [1:56:35] and create more dilemmas for them than I think they even imagined today. [1:56:38] Thank you very much. [1:56:40] You back, Mr. Chairman. [1:56:41] Thank the gentleman. [1:56:42] I recognize Ms. McCollum for any closing comments. [1:56:45] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [1:56:46] I'll be submitting some questions for the record on behalf of Representative Kaptur. [1:56:51] Last year, the President requested the first trillion-dollar defense budget. [1:56:55] Congress provided over $150 billion in reconciliation and $903 billion in discretionary spending. [1:57:04] I continue, and I think you heard from many of us up here that mandatory funding for defense is not a great idea. [1:57:11] We should avoid it at all costs. [1:57:13] The budget request for this upcoming fiscal year has grown to $1.5 trillion. [1:57:18] It's a 50% increase, but the department doesn't seem to have enough to cover its budget holes here in the department. [1:57:24] I'm going to give you two examples. [1:57:27] One is reprogramming. [1:57:29] Just the National Guard alone has $600 million of reprogramming. [1:57:34] None of their emissions were budgeted for, and now we're being asked to, now you need to move money around. [1:57:40] You're asking us to move money around to cover that. [1:57:43] That was money that was approved for other purposes, so it creates a hole. [1:57:47] The Army submitted a request to move nearly $1 billion around to fill personnel shortfalls. [1:57:53] The Navy has $907 million hole and needs to cover for its personnel. [1:57:58] So those are problems, and this is why we want things baked into the base bill. [1:58:03] And then when it comes to the supplemental, the Iran war has cost Americans at least now, if I've got it right, Mr. Hurst, $29 billion to date without a lot of things haven't been accounted for yet. [1:58:16] And the department's requesting more money for munitions outside of the base budget. [1:58:20] So bottom line, I want your takeaway message to be, I'm deeply concerned that the department can't seem to manage $1 trillion that Congress provided last year. [1:58:29] So gentlemen, we need information. [1:58:32] We mark our bill up on June 11th. [1:58:35] And we need to be able to justify, to do our fiduciary responsibility to the taxpayers, any increased funding that you seek. [1:58:43] So we expect the information that we've been asking for on munitions and supplemental requests as soon as possible. [1:58:50] I would say, by the end of next week. [1:58:52] So I thank you all for being here. [1:58:54] And Mr. Chairman, we watched some of the other hearings. [1:58:57] This is the way especially a hearing should be conducted, especially when it's dealing with international defense, when we ask people to put their lives on the line. [1:59:05] I thank everyone for a respectful hearing, but we need the information, Mr. Secretary. [1:59:09] I yield back. [1:59:10] Thank the gentlelady, and that's something we are going to agree with. [1:59:14] The other side is that we, sooner is better. [1:59:17] It makes my job easier. [1:59:18] And at the end of the day, it makes your job easier, Mr. Secretary. [1:59:21] If we can get the information both on the base budget and on the supplemental. [1:59:26] Just as a comment that Ed Case was making about some of the cost on this thing, [1:59:33] I hope the Kuwaitis are going to come up with the money for those three F-15s that we lost. [1:59:38] And that's a considerable amount of money. [1:59:41] But I want to thank the Secretary and the General Cain for answering questions before the subcommittee today. [1:59:46] I look forward to continuing to work with you as we move forward with the fiscal year 27 appropriations process, [1:59:53] and we can fund the men and women who serve us well in the United States military. [1:59:58] With that, we're adjourned.