▶ 0:18:37All right, the committee will come to order. Without objection, the chair reserves the right to declare the committee in recess at any point. Before we begin, I want to remind those uh in the audience that this hearing is open to the public, but actions that disrupt or distract the proceedings will not be The chair reserves the right to remove disruptive persons from the hearing. The US Capital Police are on hand to assist with that task and I thank them for their service.
▶ 0:19:08One housekeeping note before we get started. Uh we are expecting to be called to the house for uh floor for votes around 10:30. We'll go as long as we can up until those votes and then I ask members to come back as as soon as they can after voting. Uh upon conclusion um well I also want to ask members when you're uh entering and leaving the chamber because there's hearings going on all across the capital because this time of day please go in and out through the side door.
▶ 0:19:36Those doors make a lot of racket when you come in and out. So, uh, ingress and egress through the Annie room. All right, with that, I want to welcome our witnesses and thank them for their service to our nation. Uh, we are here meeting today to review the Pentagon's FY27 budget request. Each year, the budget presentation gives us the opportunity to take a hard look at the threats we face and our ability to deter and defeat them.
▶ 0:20:03It helps us decide on a level of investment that will actually secure our homeland and protect our interest across the globe. Here are the facts that underly this year's budget request. We are confronting an unprecedented global threat environment with multiple adversaries working together to undermine our security and that of our allies. They are building alliances and supporting each other with drones, munitions, missile technology, and energy supplies.
▶ 0:20:33And China is leading the charge against us. As you can see from this graphic, 25 years ago, the PLA was just a defensive force with little ability to project beyond uh power beyond their borders. Today, the PLA is a modernized military force capable of projecting power well into the Pacific.
▶ 0:20:55Their rapid military buildup has delivered thousands of new ships, subs, missiles, and space assets that severely challenge our ability to safeguard our national security interest in Indoacific. China continues to invest heavily in the PLA's military modernization, announcing another 7% increase in defense spending this year. As a result, they are spending more of their GDP on defense than we are.
▶ 0:21:23In fact, as you can see from this graphic, all of our adversaries are spending more of their GDP on defense than we are. Meanwhile, our defense spending as a percentage of GDP has been steadily falling since World War II. That yellow line that you see on the graph cutting across that bar represents four to 5% of GDP spending.
▶ 0:21:47History has shown that meeting or exceeding that level of investment ensures we can truly deter ad our adversaries. That's also the level of investment we're asking our allies to make. But for years, we've chosen not to make that same level of investment ourselves. Since World War II, defense spending has shrunk significantly as a percentage of out federal outlays, as you can see from the red line on that chart.
▶ 0:22:13Nonetheless, uh non-defense spending, on the other hand, accounts for over 85% and it's been increasing for that same period of time. This underinvestment in our defense has had very real consequences. Our defense industrial base, long the envy of the world, has atrophied significantly. We're no longer capable of manufacturing for our war fighters at scale or speed. Just look at ship building. China builds 47% of the world's ships.
▶ 0:22:44The US builds onetenth of 1%. We build fewer ships than Croatia or the Our global munition stockpiles are low and we lack the capacity to rapidly restock magazine depth. We have very little industrial capacity to mine, refine, or process critical minerals. As a result, many of our defense supply chains are reliant on the very adversaries we seek to deter.
▶ 0:23:14Beyond the impact of our to our industrial base, the inadequate investment in our defense has resulted in a vicious cycle that has p pitted sustainment against modernization. For years, administration after comes to this committee with budgets asking us to decommission weapon systems that they admit we still need.
▶ 0:23:38Or to cut funding for training, parts, and supplies, or to put off needed maintenance to the facilities where our service members live and work, or to reduce the number of military personnel. These budgets have asked us to make these sacrifices and accept the near-term risk so we could afford to reinvest in military modernization, which is something we desperately need to do. But we in Congress consistently rejected this mutually exclusive choice.
▶ 0:24:07Instead, we divided up the limited budget we were given and made a worse choice. We underfunded both sustainment and modernization. The result is we don't have near enough munitions, ships, aircraft, or autonomous systems to ensure dominance against every And the ships and aircraft we do have suffer from unacceptably low mission capable rates. Fortunately, that's about to change.
▶ 0:24:35This president has requested a historic $1.5 trillion budget for our national defense. For the first time in over 40 years, we've been presented a budget that accounts for the true cost of American deterrence. This budget fully funds both sustainment and modernization. It provides a 24% increase in operation and maintenance, including a 20% increase in core readiness programs like flight hours and combat exercises.
▶ 0:25:04It includes a 115% increase in funding to repair and improve facilities for our service members and their families. It increases military instrength by 44,000 and provides for a historic pay raise for our service members. It calls for an unprecedented 76% increase in procurement and 64% increase in research and development.
▶ 0:25:28This will enable us to truly catch up in our modernization efforts to quick by quickly fielding new munitions, aircraft, ships, land, space, and autonomous systems to replenish and expand our arsenal. It directly confronts the challenges in our defense industrial base with over a hundred billion dollars in investments to revitalize manufacturing, expand domestic and allied critical minerals projects, and secure our supply chains.
▶ 0:25:58Finally, this level of investment gets defense back to 4 and a.5%. That's where we need to be if we want to truly deter conflict. It also ensures that America leads by example as our allies heed the president's call to increase their defense spending and improve their military readiness.
▶ 0:26:21I would also note that it's critical that we do not reduce deterrence while we're asking our allies to ramp up their own capacity and that's something we're going to be paying a lot of attention to in this committee. Before I close my remarks, I want to highlight the bravery, dedication, and professionalism of our war fighters throughout this conflict with Iran.
▶ 0:26:41Their tremendous work to achieve the very clear military objectives of this operation has given the president the opening he needs to negotiate a true and lasting peace that will ensure Iran never acquires a nuclear weapon. Mr. Secretary, General Kaine, thank you for being here. I look forward to hearing how this budget request will ensure our military can preserve American deterrence for generations to come. And with that, I yield to my friend, the ranking member, for his opening statement.
▶ 0:27:11Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate those opening remarks. I I want to start by agreeing with you on the last point. Our troops have performed incredibly well in the last 15 months. They have been asked to do more than anyone expected and they have demonstrated the incredible capability of the United States military. I think we should all recognize that even if we question the strategy, some of the decisions behind it, our troops deserve nothing but our praise for the incredible job that they have done. It has not been perfect.
▶ 0:27:37Certainly mistakes have been made, but we have demonstrated to the world that we have a highly capable military. And I hear the chairman on the, you know, need for an increased budget. I think there's a whole lot of needs across the United States of America that would have the same attitude about healthcare, about education, about infrastructure. But the problem is we have a $40 trillion debt and we insist on cutting taxes for absolutely everybody. So we reduce the amount of revenue that is available to that.
▶ 0:28:04We also have to have a national security strategy that lives within a sound fiscal picture. Most experts would say that the most profound threat to our national security right now is exactly that is our fiscal picture. How are we going to continue to be able to afford to fund the things we need to fund as we run the debt ever higher? The other thing worth worrying about is the Pentagon has not yet passed an audit. If we give them what is roughly a 50 to 60% increase, is that money going to be well spent?
▶ 0:28:35We have every reason to doubt that. Now, I will say and I praise the chairman, this committee, and in a bipartisan biccameal way, we have tackled the problem of acquisition reform. I think last year's bill put us on a good trajectory to get to the point where we can in fact innovate faster at scale. I also believe the Pentagon and has been working on that. We've had many meetings with Deputy Secretary Fineberg who is focused on that. But we got a long way to go.
▶ 0:29:01Can the Pentagon really absorb another five $600 billion depending on what the supplemental and the reconciliation package are? I don't think so. We need to pay as much attention to how we're spending the money as to how much we're spending. And we never seem to do that. But the larger problem is the strategy that has been put before us. I I looked through the secretary's remarks and I've heard you give speeches before about this about how realism is our strategy. A and I find that absurd.
▶ 0:29:31Um and given what we are doing, you can say a lot of things about the strategy, but calling it realistic, we started a fullscale war in the Middle East against Iran to try to reshape the Middle East. Now, we can talk about that in a bunch of different ways, but it is the exact opposite of realism.
▶ 0:29:49And in fact, starting wars in the Middle East that get out of control and lead us to have far greater costs for the benefits is one of the cornerstones of the unrealistic strategy that this administration has criticized over and over and over again. And yet here we are in a full-scale M East war. And we seen the costs of that. Certainly at the top of that list is 13 service members killed and hundreds wounded. But it goes way beyond that that thousands of civilians have been killed.
▶ 0:30:17Over a dozen countries now have been dragged into this war in one way or another. The Israel Lebanese Lebanon war has exploded since this war started. We now have a conflict between the Shia militias in Iraq and Kurdistan that is straining um to put it mildly our relationship with Iraq and also causing greater chaos throughout the Middle East. We've seen the impact on the economy certainly here at home. Gas prices up by over a dollar. The impact of the fertilizer increase is going to come later as food prices skyrocket.
▶ 0:30:48But what it's happening to us is a small part of what's happening to the rest of the world. Certainly the Middle East's economy has been tossed up in the air, but dozens of countries are rationing gasoline as we speak and experiencing extreme economic pain because of this war. So there's nothing realistic about that. And one of the big questions that we need to get answered today is where is this going? what is the plan to achieve our objectives? We've seen the cost and the cost is very very high.
▶ 0:31:18All we keep hearing on the objectives is we keep seeing all of the targets that we have struck and again that is an incredible accomplishment uh from a tactical standpoint. I think the proficiency of our military has been on display, but we're not in this for a tactical advantage. We're in this to fundamentally change Iran. And as we sit here today, Iran's nuclear program is exactly what it was before this war started. They have not lost their capacity to inflict pain. They still have a ballistic missile program.
▶ 0:31:47They're still still able to blockade the straight of Hormuz and have the ships that are capable of doing that. What is the plan to get that to change? And most disturbingly, the president keeps telling us that it's over. What was it? A week ago, Friday, the president announced that Iran had agreed to give up their nuclear program, to give up their ballistic missile program, to stop support for terrorist groups, to reopen the straight of Hormuz. The only problem with that is literally none of that was true. It was he was completely making it up.
▶ 0:32:16It wasn't Iran hadn't even agreed to meet with us, as became embarrassingly clear as the day spun out and poor JD Vance had to keep going back and forth to the airport. We never even had a meeting. So wish fulfillment is not really a strategy. I mean maybe the president thinks he's doing some sort of Jedi mind trick and he can tell Iran you will give up your nuclear weapons and they automatically will. But that's not working. So what we need to hear today is what is going to work?
▶ 0:32:45We have 50,000 troops in the region who are still at risk. How are those tactical victories going to translate into some sort of strategic success? And by the way, this is one of the things that realism recognizes. You can win a whole lot of little small battles and lose the war, which is why you don't stumble into the war in the first place. But at the same time, we're doing all of this on our own as we increasingly push away all of our allies.
▶ 0:33:14Sometimes just because we want to do what we want to do. Um, we don't want to have to consult them. Sometimes just gratuitously insulting them. I mean, in the middle of this war where we were asking NATO to come join us, the president took time out to insult President Mcronone and his wife. Okay. H how is that helping us to try and belittle everybody in the world? And I also for the people who are criticizing NATO over this war, I will remind people that NATO is a defensive alliance.
▶ 0:33:42What that means is every country in it pledges to defend a country if attacked. And when we were attacked on 911, that's what NATO did. They put in article 5 and for 20 years they fought beside us. NATO is not if any one of the countries decides to unilaterally and unwisely start a war precipitously that everyone else is supposed to join. That's not the way it works.
▶ 0:34:06So beriding and belittling our allies after we did that and driving them ever further away from us. How is that realistic? Not only are we going to try to reshape the Middle East, but we're going to do it alone while we're pushing everybody away from us. And then we have other tools in our arsenal. You see that those numbers on the budget, but the State Department is really important. Development is really important. These are ways to achieve our ends and we have moved away from that.
▶ 0:34:32We we got rid of the entire US ID literally causing the starvation of children in countries where we had pledged to provide food you know causing massive health care disruptions people literally dying because we've cut that off. In diplomacy we have sidelined again the entire world. France and the UK have brought together 44 different countries that have an interest in trying to open up the straight of Hormuz. We've pushed them all aside and then we've even pushed aside our own diplomatic core.
▶ 0:35:01We have a very very talented State Department. I praise today the talent of our military and I will stand by that. They deserve that praise. Our diplomatic corps deserves that praise too. But we've shoved them all to the side in favor of two real estate guys who are going to go negotiate all the deals in the world, which to date, by the way, has yielded exactly nothing. So there's nothing realistic about starting a war in the Middle East, going it alone, and pushing aside all diplomacy and all development, all other tools in our arsenal.
▶ 0:35:32And on top of that, of course, we also want to dominate the entire Western Hemisphere. Um, you know, including apparently annexing Canada and invading Greenland. How is any of that realistic? And then and then the administration comes before us and ask for what is a hopelessly unrealistic budget in this environment. Back in that chart there when we were showing how much money we were spending on defense, we had a balanced budget. We had a surplus many years. We don't have that anymore.
▶ 0:36:02So, call this strategy whatever you want to call it, but please don't call it realism. It's not. Forgive me. It reminds me of one of my favorite lines from A Princess Bride. It's a tense morning. I want to lighten it up a little bit. Uh but the guy keeps saying inconceivable when things happen. And finally the guy says to him, "You keep using that word. I don't think you know what it means. I don't think we know what the word realism means. So please, can we not have the realism conversation?
▶ 0:36:31Let's have the conversation about what the strategy actually is." And I'm sure you have a different definition of it than I do. But as I look at it, the strategy seems to be to use as much violence, as much threats, as much coercion as possible to bend the world to our will. I think that is a very dangerous strategy because one of the oldest cliches in the military is the enemy gets a vote.
▶ 0:36:56And we may think that we can stand up and talk tough and talk about how strong we are and how we're burying our enemies and they're begging for a deal. We can do that all day long. All right, but the enemy gets a vote. They don't have to do what we tell them to do. And meanwhile, that coercive violent strategy undermines our credibility in the world because the chairman is absolutely right.
▶ 0:37:17And this is one area where I strongly disagree with the folks on the far left who say that we don't really face any threats that the US is a maligned influence in the world and always has been. I don't agree with that. China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthies, v variety of other transnational terrorist groups, including yes, naroterrorists um and human traffickers over here. They all are trying to weaken us. All right? They don't want a rules-based order. They want to play by their own rules. They want to push us aside.
▶ 0:37:46We want to be the side that stands up for the rules. But if what we're saying to the rest of the world is stick with us because we're a better bully than China. We we coersse countries more effectively, that undercuts the very message we're trying to spread to build the coalition we need to be successful. I also worry about the values that we are showing the world when the president threatens to kill off an entire civilization. That that is the message coming out of the United States of America.
▶ 0:38:17If we are going to be this big powerful force that throws our weight around the world. The world wants to know at a minimum that we're doing it for the right reasons and with a sense of values to protect people, not to destroy entire civilizations. And we all hear that and we all go, "Well, gosh, you know, he probably doesn't mean it." Well, that is so reassuring, okay, that he's just making it up. was supposed to be the United States of America.
▶ 0:38:43I grew up on stories of the US at the end of World War II being the country that the Germans wanted to surrender to, not the Russians, because they knew they could trust our values. We don't seem to care about those values. No rules of engagement. Give them no quarter. All right? That is not who we are supposed to be. And just one final point on that. the girl school that got hit in the first days of this war.
▶ 0:39:12There is absolutely no question at this point what happened. We made a mistake and that happens in war. We identified this target based on earlier charts and yet two months after it happened. We refuse to say anything about it, giving the world the impression that we just don't care. We do not care about the casualties and the chaos that is caused by our war. and we should care even if we want to prosecute that war. Now, I agree with the chairman. We need a strategy.
▶ 0:39:42We face the most complex threat environment that we've faced in a very, very long time. So, we really want to hear from the administration. Don't give us this realism chest thumping stuff. What are we really going to do to meet those threats to deal with the challenges we face? And I'll close just by saying one of the other ironies of this of course is we have a great example in the world right now of what our strategy should be and where our values should be and that's Ukraine. And I'm really curious, you know, here we are.
▶ 0:40:12We roll out the red carpet for Vladimir Putin. We belittle and insult President Zullinsky in the White House. He has no cards, right? Well, here we are a year after that. Looks like he had a couple cards to play because Ukraine is actually winning against Russia.
▶ 0:40:28Ukraine, a sovereign democracy, standing up against a brutal, oppressive, coercive dictatorship and we can't even bring ourselves on a consistent basis to say we are with Ukraine and we are against what Putin is doing and stand up and support them. So I want to see that strategy to meet the complex threat environment that we have.
▶ 0:40:50But simply saying we've already won and boasting and bragging and trying to belittle and insult the entire world, that's not going to get us to the posture that we need. So I hope we have a conversation about how we can build a strategy that makes sense and is actually realistic without a yield back. I thank the ranking member for his opening statement. Uh now I'd like to introduce our witnesses and we have the honorable Pete Higgs, Secretary of War.
▶ 0:41:18General Dan Kaine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and they are being accompanied by Mr. Jay Hurst, acting chief financial officer and comproller for the department. I also want to welcome the secretary's wife, Jennifer. Welcome to our hearing. Glad to have you here with us today. And with that, Mr. Secretary, we'll start with you. You're
▶ 0:41:38Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, Ranking Member Smith, distinguished members of the committee, we appreciate the opportunity to testify in full support of President Trump's historic $1.5 trillion fiscal year 2027 budget request for the Department of War.
▶ 0:41:56The president's budget request reflects the urgency of the moment, addressing both the deferment of long-standing problems as well as positioning our forces for both the current and the future fight. We think divesting to invest is a strategy of austerity. I'm honored to appear alongside General Dan Kaine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as well as Jay Hurst, our comproller or chief financial officer.
▶ 0:42:24I'd like to start by thanking this committee and Congress for your partnership in securing the investments needed for a stronger, prder, and more secure America. I think what our troops have demonstrated to the world over the last 15 months are a reflection of that. A nation's ability to build, innovate, and support the critical needs of its war fighters at speed and at scale is the foundation upon which its survival rests.
▶ 0:42:53However, upon taking office on January 20th, 2025, President Trump inherited a defense industrial base that had been hollowed out by years of America last policies, resulting in a diminished ability to project strength.
▶ 0:43:10Under the previous administration, we were focused on offshoring and riddled with cost overruns and degraded Under the leadership of President Trump, our builder in chief, we are reversing this systemic decay and putting our defense industrial base back on a wartime footing. If you ask anyone at our Pentagon, urgency informs everything we do.
▶ 0:43:36We're rebuilding a military that the American people can be proud of, one that instills nothing less than unrelenting fear in our adversaries and the utmost confidence in our allies. We fight to win in every scenario.
▶ 0:43:50The $ 1.5 trillion FY27 budget put forward by the president will build upon the historic $1 trillion FY26 topline and continue to reverse the four years of underinvestment and mismanagement of the Biden administration.
▶ 0:44:08The $ 1.5 trillion budget will ensure the United States continues to maintain the world's most powerful and capable military as we grapple with a complex threat environment across multiple theaters. Not to mention, this budget also includes a historic troop pay increase 7% for lower enlisted and the budget eliminates all poor or failing barracks.
▶ 0:44:34Quality of life for our troops is front and center in this budget as By supercharging our industrial capability and transforming how the department does business, we're restoring American commercial dominance at a pace unseen in generations.
▶ 0:44:53Transforming the defense industrial base from a broken, slowmoving system of the We have flipped the Pentagon acquisition process from a bureaucratic model to a business model 180. Decisively moving from an acquisition environment paralyzed by bureaucratic red tape into an outcomesdriven organization focused on delivering the most at cost at scale for taxpayer dollars.
▶ 0:45:22Over the past year, through historic multi-year procurement agreements, smart business deals for things like critical munitions and capabilities, we've sent an unambiguous demand signal to industry partners to build more and build faster.
▶ 0:45:39The result has been a surge, a revitalization of our great factories and a massive reinvestment in the skilled American workers who serve as the industrial muscle behind our Let me briefly pres provide you with some concrete highlevel metrics of what's been accomplished over just the past few months. These are announced new facilities and investments to support American war fighters. and I would refer you to the screen.
▶ 0:46:10The department has helped stimulate more than 250 private investment deals in 39 states in 180 cities and 150 companies worth more than $50 billion. It's resulted in 280 new or expanded facilities, more than 18 million new square feet of American manufacturing, and more than 70,000 new jobs in These, this is the key part of this, these $50 billion
▶ 0:46:40of investment in new new assembly lines, and new factories. These are private investments, not taxpayer dollars. By changing our departments, transforming our department's business model, American companies are investing in America with their own money, their own capital. a historic demonstration of American manufacturing and defense revitalization.
▶ 0:47:07All again with their capital, not Uncle Sam's. This has never been done before and is long overdue. from a bureaucratic model to a business model. Anyone on the outside looking in at what's been done inside this Pentagon in the last 12 months cannot deny the fundamental transformation at speed, at scale to innovate and meet the threats of today and tomorrow.
▶ 0:47:33These investments equal great things for America, American families, and American workers and help to ensure that our war fighters are able to defend the American dream and all Together with the help of the policy updates and appropriations passed by Congress, President Trump's War Department has begun to turn the lights back on in manufacturing towns across this country and once again forging a lethal arsenal of freedom.
▶ 0:48:00Where critical supply chains are threatened, the War Department has acted decisively to inject capital, stimulate production, and prevent adversarial exploitation. We are firing up the American economic engine and at every level of our defense industrial base. Every policy we pursue, every budgetary item we request serves to ensure that the department remains laser focused on increasing lethality and survivability of our forces from the front lines to the factory floors.
▶ 0:48:30This is a historic budget as you said, Mr. Chairman. This is a fiscally responsible budget. This is a warfighting budget. And speaking of war fighting, a topic the topic of Iran I'm sure will come up today which I very much welcome discussing. I look forward to sharing the incredible successes of our military achieved in a matter of weeks.
▶ 0:48:55President Trump, unlike other president, has had the courage to ensure Iran never gets a nuclear weapon and he's ironclad in that. We have the best negotiator in the world driving that deal. The biggest challenge, the biggest adversary we face at this point are the reckless, feckless, and defeist words of congressional Democrats and some Republicans. Two months in, I remind you two months in to a conflict.
▶ 0:49:25Lest I remind you, and my generation understands how long we were in Iraq, how long we were in Afghanistan, how long we were in Vietnam. Two months in, on an existential fight for the safety of the American people. Iran cannot have a nuclear bomb. We are proud of this undertaking. I am proud that President Trump was have the courage to do it, and I look forward to sharing more about what our troops have accomplished. So, I thank you again for the opportunity to address this committee.
▶ 0:49:53I ask that may God that God would continue to watch over our troops in harm's way and those that have fallen are always in our memory and we fight to ensure their legacy. Look forward to answering the questions of this committee.
▶ 0:50:06Thank you, Mr. Secretary. General Kane, you're recogni you're recognized.
▶ 0:50:10Thank you, Chairman Rogers, Ranking Member Smith, and members of this committee. Thanks for having me today. I'm honored to be here today alongside the honorable Pete Hegth and Honorable Jay Hurst to testify in the president's fiscal year 2027 budget. I'm grateful for the opportunity to testify today and I'm thankful for your continued partnership in support of our war fighters defending the homeland and our interests around the world.
▶ 0:50:35It's a privilege to speak with you today about the foundation of America's strength, our 2.8 million members of our joint force. And I'm continually inspired by our soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, guardians, and coast guard guardsmen, and our civilians standing the watch for our nation, supported always by their families. Each and every one of them could have chosen another path, but they don't. They choose to serve and to do something more important than themselves.
▶ 0:51:04and every day they meet the nation's challenges from combat operations to critical support roles with the courage, tenacity, and grit that keeps our nation strong and secure. I would also like to express my deep gratitude for the 39 members of our joint force who've passed away during my time as the chairman, including 14 who've passed during Operation Epic Fury.
▶ 0:51:30As the secretary said, we are deeply grateful for each of them and their families, and their names will never be forgotten. As the chairman, my duty is to ensure our civilian leadership has a comprehensive range of military options and the associated risks that uh to those leaders who make the nation's hardest decisions and offer my military advice privately. I owe the president, the secretary, and the congress the truth at every turn.
▶ 0:51:59My blueprint for this role is General George C. Marshall. His commitment to civilian control of the military and nonpartisan military remains a constant standard and something I borrow from often. I strive daily to emulate his cander, delivering the facts to our leaders and telling them always what they need to hear, not always what they want to hear. And once a decision is made, executing it with absolute dedication.
▶ 0:52:28and that is the demand of our profession. I sit here today before you representing our incredible joint force and I want to emphasize my commitment to this committee and the Congress that I will always follow General Marshall's steadfast example as by providing clear and candid nonpartisan military advice and working together with our civilian leaders to ensure that our military does the things that we must do.
▶ 0:52:55being prepared to deter and defend our nation and if called upon win our wars around the world. America's joint force is operational at its core. Purposebuilt for the realities of a complex and everchanging world. We are organized, trained, and equipped to execute the most demanding missions across the globe with unrivaled pre precision.
▶ 0:53:18Over the past year, our war fighters have consistently demonstrated exactly what it means to be the most capable, adaptable, and most professional military force in the world. Our shared goals are to ensure the joint force remains the strateg maintains the strategic initiative and advantage, projecting American power and responding to global challenges on our nation's terms.
▶ 0:53:46During operations Rough Rider, Midnight Hammer, Southern Spear, Absolute Resolve, and Epic Fury, the joint force executed globally integrated operations and missions alongside our inter agency and international partners.
▶ 0:54:02And once our civilian leaders made a decision, we make those missions our own, demonstrating the unmatched capability to seamlessly synchronize our capabilities across all domains from the seabed to cis lunar space and higher. We're able to accomplish these complicated missions and work because we draw from a deep enduring reservoir of training, professionalism, and commitment.
▶ 0:54:31Our operational tempo is high, but we're designed to sustain and rebuild our strength continuously. We build readiness every day. We train professionals every day. We learn and sharpen our edges every day by being learning leaders. And I am incredibly proud to be a member of this joint force team. Proud of the team and proud of the commanders.
▶ 0:54:55As the chairman and the ranking member both said, we live in complex and dynamic times where global risk is scaling. The complexity of today's modern battlefields demands our constant adaptation, innovation, and partnership with this Congress. As a joint force, we're up to the challenge. We're built for this environment. However, continued success is not guaranteed by past achievements.
▶ 0:55:24It must be secured through forward-looking partnerships with Congress. And to drive this pace and change and maintain our superiority, we need timely, predictable, and sustained investment. The resources we discussed today are critical to modernizing our force and ensuring that whatever threats emerge in the future, that your joint force is ready to meet those challenges to protect our interests and defend our nation.
▶ 0:55:53As the secretary said, the president's fiscal year 2027 budget supports the department's goals of recharging the defense industrial base and the national industrial base, ensuring our military is ready, securing our military advantage. Within the joint force, the uniform side, our priorities remain the same. Ensuring our war fighters are properly armed, globally integrated, and ready while always taking care of our people.
▶ 0:56:20And what truly sets our people apart from other militaries around the world is the 1.8 million members enlisted members of our force who maintain readiness beyond reproach and are the envy of every other nation. I'm joined today by the senior enlisted adviser to the chairman Dave Isim who's here with me today representing the 1.8 million members of the enlisted force. He is a great American, not an American.
▶ 0:56:51And while we face dynamic and a dangerous world, I have the absolute trust in the extraordinary men and women who come and volunteer to serve our nation within our joint force. They execute the missions quietly every day. and coupled with the American spirit, outthink, out compete, and relentlessly innovate. We will maintain our decisive edge, but doing so requires your partnership.
▶ 0:57:20We stand ready today to answer our nation's call. It remains the honor of a lifetime for me to serve alongside the members of this joint force. And as we sit here today in this important hearing, I ask us all to remember our deployed teammates who are out there right now doing our nation's business. And may we again always remember our fallen who've given us the gift of an incredible example and their family members who continue to show us what courage and grit look like.
▶ 0:57:50Thank you again for your enduring support and I look forward to your questions.
▶ 0:57:54Thank you, General. I recognize myself now for questions. Secretary Higgsithth, thank you for undertaking the Arsenal of Freedom Tour and the great work the department's doing to help enhance our capacity in our defense industrial base. Could you tell us how last year's reconciliation bill helped enable um what you have been able to do and what you think this year's FY27 budget request will do on on that front?
▶ 0:58:21Well, Mr. Chairman, thank you for your leadership and your support on that topic. I mean, coming into this position, we fell in on a lot of the reforms you and this committee have been advocating for for a long time, looking for somebody that was willing to run with them, and our department have have run with those. And that reconciliation bill last year was kind of the rocket fuel to initiate uh President Trump's priorities in this department. So, we fell in on a department that was focused on a lot of the wrong things, going in the wrong direction.
▶ 0:58:48Uh and with reconciliation, we're able to put, you know, 22 billion in ship building, 22 billion into Golden Dome, 25 billion into munitions, established drone dominance, which we're continuing to do to this day in this next budget funds. So getting in front of that budget cycle which had been notoriously unpredictable
▶ 0:59:07uh out of coming out of the continuing revol resolution of FY25 to fund this and then a bill a historic bill in FY26 laid the groundwork for this historic budget to ensure that we're not coming at a cold start here. We came into this administration reconciliation was a beautiful tool. We were able to use that through that one big beautiful bill to fund the priorities of this department. We spent on four billion on barracks, started immediately getting after the quality of life of barracks.
▶ 0:59:34Uh because of the austerity of the Biden administration, we traded off of maintenance, traded off of quality of life to try to fund other things operationally. Uh this budget stops that cycle and both invests in sustainment and modernization, uh which is which is something that's critically important. So without that reconciliation bill, I think, Mr. Chairman, we'd be in a very different place. So thank you for that.
▶ 0:59:55Great. Well, as you are aware, the expansion of the defense industrial base is the principal focus of this year's NDAA. So, in addition to enacting this budget uh request that's been submitted, we want to work with you to enhance the department's statutory authorities to improve the capacity of our DIB. What additional changes in law, such as the additional multi-year uh block by authority, would you recommend that we pursue in this year's NDAA?
▶ 1:00:24a few aspects of the uh acquisition transition uh transformation that's been undertaken by under secretary Duffy in acquisitions and sustainment. So, there are some aspects of that we'd like to codify even more. But you mentioned it, multi-year procurement is incredibly important and one of the most important parts of this bill. When this committee and this Congress funds those things, companies are already breaking ground on tens of billions of dollars of new plants.
▶ 1:00:49uh you you name the we've got 14 in our u ammunition council that we're focusing on certain ammunitions there are 14 that are critical you know pack 3es sm3s sm6s thads patriots tomahawks am rams jasms you you name prisms you name them we were building them at too slow and too low a level now the companies are going to pay for those factories and those production lines and when you're when Congress gives those five to sevenyear demand signals they'll
▶ 1:01:19then fund it not just hey can we get 10 more per month but can we 2x 3x 4x the production uh pay for it now and the companies invest uh accordingly so it's been a a critical aspect of some of what we've done so far but we need more of those five to sevenyear uh
▶ 1:01:37great Kaine what does the $ 1.5 trillion budget mean for the war fighter and our ability to project forces and secure our interest around the globe chairman. Uh, you know, in my in my view, this this represents a a historic down payment on future security.
▶ 1:01:56Um, if if the budget is approved and ultimately deployed as we look at the character of warfare changing very very fast, what's layered in uh to this budget by our civilian leaders will allow us to start getting ahead of where uh technology is evolving. And and as I mentioned, the character of war fighting is is changing pretty quickly.
▶ 1:02:20Mass simultaneity, autonomy, undersea, space, cyber, information, all of those those ways that are now manifesting themselves on the battlefields around the world um require a higher end of capital investment. And that's why we're grateful for the opportunity to have this budget make its way to the joint force. So, it's an important uh down payment on the future here, sir.
▶ 1:02:47Great. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Uh, with that, I yield to the ranking member for any questions he may have.
▶ 1:02:51Uh, thank you. Uh, Mr. Hurst, drag you into the conversation here. We have not yet received from the Pentagon the costs of the war. Um, so just for the record, we'd like to get that as soon as possible. Certainly, the munitions expended, but also under reportported is we've had a fair amount of equipment uh destroyed, including two C130s with the rescue of our downed airmen. Um, so do you have either a a cost estimate coming to us anytime soon or b a specific supplemental request?
▶ 1:03:22Thank you for that question. Um, so approximately at this day we're spending about $25 billion on Operation Epic Fury. U most of that is munitions. There's part of that is obviously O andM and equipment replacement. We will formulate a supplemental uh through the White House that will come to Congress once we have a full assessment of the cost of the conflict. Sure. So, you're saying the full cost at this point is 25
▶ 1:03:43Yeah, that's our estimate for the cost.
▶ 1:03:45Okay. Interesting. Because we I'm glad you answered that question because we've been asking for a hell of a long time and no one's given us the number. Um so, if you could get those details over to us, that that would be great. Um Mr. Secretary, you mentioned the the nuclear aspect of Iran and the war. And it is worth noting that every president prior to this one, including President Trump in his first term, also prevented Iran from getting a nuclear weapon without actually having to go to war in Iran. So, we need to keep that in mind.
▶ 1:04:11But also, since the war started, Iran's nuclear arsenal has not been weakened in any way. And at the moment in negotiations, what Iran is saying, basically, pay us to open up the straight. That that's their position, which is completely untenable. I agree. Um, it's worth noting, of course, that the straight was open before the war started. Now, we're negotiating to get back to status quo. And Iran's most recent offer is to say, we'll talk about nukes later.
▶ 1:04:38So, what is the plan to actually turn all of this lethal kinetic action into an improvement in the nuclear situation because we haven't gotten there yet. Play it out for us. How does that happen? How does it actually lead to that result?
▶ 1:04:53Well, I would take issue with the premise of the question that nothing was done. Operation Midnight Hammer was a a very effective
▶ 1:04:58Well, I didn't say nothing was done. I said in this war ultimately war started.
▶ 1:05:02Well, this is this under this administration, unlike other administrations which cut bad deals and pallets of cash with no ability to oversee whether Iran is actually pursuing a nuclear program. You want to litigate JCPOA or the Iran deal. Our view, the president's views, that was a very bad deal. that gave them a bunch of money up front to fund. You talked about negotiated deals, funded, allowed them to fund their proxies and spread Hamas and Hezbollah all around the region, build up nuclear capabilities. What are we going to do now?
▶ 1:05:30President Trump has been cleareyed from the killing of Kasumsmani to the pulling out of the Iran deal to Midnight Hammer and now to this effort to recognize that you have to stare down this kind of enemy who's hellbent on getting a nuclear weapon and get them to a point where they're at the table giving it up uh in a way that never have it.
▶ 1:05:48So they haven't broken yet. Okay, we haven't gotten there yet for all of the
▶ 1:05:53Well, their nuclear facilities have been obliterated underground. They're buried and we're watching them 24/7. But we know where any nuclear material
▶ 1:06:01reclaiming my time for a quick second
▶ 1:06:04We had to start this war. You just said 60 days ago because the nuclear weapon was an imminent threat. Now you're saying that it was completely
▶ 1:06:15They had not given up their nuclear ambitions and they had a conventional shield of thousands of
▶ 1:06:20So operation midnight hamburger accomplished nothing of substance. It left us at exactly the same place we were before.
▶ 1:06:27So much so that facilities were bombed and obliterated. Their their ambitions continued and they're building a conventional shield. Let me try again.
▶ 1:06:36It's the North Korea strategy. You know this very well. The North Korea strategy was use conventional missiles to prevent anybody from challenging them so they could slow walk their way to a weapon. President Trump saw Iran at its weakest moment took an action to ensure in a way that only the United States of America could do with our Israeli partners to
▶ 1:06:56shield was was brought if I could get to it. So on Ukraine a year plus ago your advice the president's advice was Ukraine had no cards to play. They should go cut the best possible deal they could. Clearly that was wrong. What did you miss? What did you miss about the conflict between Russia and Ukraine that you didn't see that Ukraine was going to be capable of doing what they've done in the last 14 months?
▶ 1:07:21What we didn't miss, and we're here in this committee, is that Joe Biden with no accountability gave hundreds of billions of dollars of our weapons to Ukraine uh to an outcome that never would have happened if President Trump was president. So, he pulled out our You guys don't talk about that. Ultimately, President Trump believes there should be a peace deal uh between Russia and Ukraine and it serves.
▶ 1:07:40You didn't expect Ukraine to be where they're at right now. I'm asking you just from a strategic standpoint what
▶ 1:07:44I think the Ukrainians have shown great courage and I appreciate that Europe is now paying for the weap any weapons that we provide.
▶ 1:07:51All right, I yield back. Thank you.
▶ 1:07:53All right, now I want to remind everybody there's everybody wants to get their questions. So we are going to be strict sticking strictly to the fiveminute rule today. So with that I recognize the gentleman from South Carolina, Mr. Wilson. Thank you, Chairman Mike Rogers, for your leadership working with President Donald Trump. As the grateful father of four sons who've served overseas in Iraq, Egypt, and Afghanistan, I especially appreciate war secretary Hexath and Chief of Staff Kaine for your competence, service, and success.
▶ 1:08:21Military families have never been more appreciated than today, and our enemies of dictators now understand peace through strength. Dictators historically are on the run. With your leadership, President Trump has given Syria a chance with President Al-Shara replacing dictator Assad from Damascus who now lives in Moscow. Dictator Maduro is correctly in a Manhattan jail as you successfully revealed in Karacus that the war criminal Putin air defenses do not work.
▶ 1:08:50The Chinese Communist Party radar failed and Cuban mercenaries were expendable. The Cuban dictatorship is failing and the ultimate ultimate mass murderer dictator Kmeni is dead of in Tran Iran joining 35,000 people he murdered this year. With your leadership, American morale has never been higher and hopes for freedom of the oppressed people of Iran, Cuba, Russia, and China have never been higher. And it's just an exciting time to be here with you.
▶ 1:09:20And Mr. Secretary, we continue to see the growing nuclear threat of our adversaries as they expand their capabilities with the largest military buildup in peace time in world history by the Chinese Communist Party. How critical is it that we continue as at the Savannah River site in South Carolina uh to develop the plutonium pit processing so that we have
▶ 1:09:47Well, Congressman, I appreciate that question on on on nuclear modernization. And this budget funds $71 billion to modernize modernize the triad in a ways that we had neglected to do. Uh and our nuclear triad underwrites everything. But I I I really appreciate your opening statement. I think something that obviously uh the media want doesn't want to cover and doesn't want to talk about is the historic record-breaking surge in recruiting in our ranks.
▶ 1:10:1430-year record in recruiting of Americans wanting to join our joint force, wanting to put the uniform on. Uh we're meeting recruiting goals halfway through the year. We couldn't meet our recruiting goals under the previous administration. Under Joe Biden, Americans didn't want to join the military. We couldn't get it. Now, we have to turn people away and push them to the next fiscal year. That's why this budget grows our force by almost 50,000. Ultimately, additional troops into the force that we believe we can recruit.
▶ 1:10:43That's the best vote of confidence I could imagine. Even better, it's also retention.
▶ 1:10:49You're really understating. Uh leaving no leaving no airmen behind. Hey, what an inspiration on Easter day. Uh God bless y'all and what you've achieved. With that in mind too, General Kaine, with your VMI military perspective, War Colonel Putin is losing in Ukraine as his 30-day special mission is now four years of, as the secretary has identified, courageous Ukrainian success led by President Vladimir Zalinski.
▶ 1:11:15I appreciate that NATO and the EU have unified for Ukraine as the US ranks 17th per GDP in assistance for Ukraine. Ukraine is front lines stopping warn Putin from resurrecting the failed Soviet Union, rigging elections in Bellarus, invading Ukraine, keeping troops in Malddova, and with the end vice invading and rigging elections in the Republic of Georgia as we're transitioning greater responsibility to our NATO allies.
▶ 1:11:44How do we ensure seamless integration to deterrence during this shift? Congressman, the um we're we're very fortunate to have great leaders out in the European theater right now. General Grinkoich and his leadership team are committed to ensuring that that integration and transition takes place in a most combat capable and effective way.
▶ 1:12:09uh very entrepreneurial leaders out there across the components and with General Grinkovich and and uh and he's doing a great job out there as the committee knows and indeed as we conclude historically President Trump, Mr. Secretary General, you have united the Middle East nations unprecedented to ally with the United States. You have united Latin America unprecedented to ally with the United States.
▶ 1:12:34You've united the Indo-Pacific unprecedented to ally with the United States and united NATO and EU unprecedented to ally with the United States. You're achieving peace and deterrence through strength. I yield back.
▶ 1:12:49Gentleman yields back. Chair and I recognize gentleman from Connecticut, Mr. Courtney.
▶ 1:12:53Thank you, uh, Mr. Chairman. Uh, Mr. Secretary and General Kaine, this morning's Wall Street Journal's lead headline reads, quote, "Trump tells aids to prepare for an extended blockade of Iran." Uh it goes on to describe again the thinking behind the strategy but also talks about how prolonging the blockade is going to continue to drive up energy costs uh all over the world. Given the everchanging messages from this administration on the war strategy and timeline, I really honestly don't expect you to confirm or deny the journal story.
▶ 1:13:21But one thing is clear, the number of transits across the street of Hormuz has dropped to the lowest level since the war began. And commodity markets have stopped listening to the happy talk. And crude oil prices this morning have risen to the highest level since the war in Ukraine started in 2022. AAA reported this morning that the average price of gas is $4.30 a gallon, up 30 cents in one week. Diesel's average is 5.45. My friend Mr. Garmendy says in California it's closer to $8 a gallon.
▶ 1:13:51uh and fertilizer prices have also hammered farmers at exactly the same time they're beginning planting all across the country. Aside from the damage this war has done to American consumers, farmers, and small businesses, I want to f focus for a minute on the cost of the war and our military readiness, particularly to other combatant commands. Mr. Secretary, you put out a national defense strategy in January uh which listed the threat assessment uh facing our country.
▶ 1:14:20China was number one with the second largest most powerful military in the r in the world. Of course, Russia's nuclear force clearly was number two in terms of the threat they posed to the homeland. North Korea, which has missiles that actually can reach US territory, was ranked number three. And Iran was described as quote uh and accurately after Midnight Hammer that Iran's regime is weaker and more vulnerable than it has been in decades.
▶ 1:14:46Again, this was before February 28th when the decision was made to to go into the military strikes on Iran. So today, we have three carrier strike forces in central command. The Indo Indoaccom, which is where Russia and China are are operating their navies, 52% of the globe. We have one carrier strike group in Japan, George Washington.
▶ 1:15:13and the the imbalance in terms of just you know what our commitments and frankly you know what our national defense strategy I mean is just blindingly obvious in terms of what this war is doing. Gerald Ford is on day of its uh deployment.
▶ 1:15:30They've gone through fires, plumbing problems, uh, and again, an extended uh, deployment, which in my opinion is hitting readiness as hard as anything I've seen in the in the time that I've been uh, on this um, committee. So, uh, General Kaine, I mean, in terms of again the the carrier strike groups that are over there, I mean, assuming that we get to some endgame here, um, Ford is not going over to the Indoacific to buttress the the gap that exists there today.
▶ 1:16:00They've got to go back into pretty heavy repair and availability to in terms of trying to recover from from their deployment. So again, in terms of just, you know, the decisions about where we're putting people and and putting really the most powerful part of our our navy, you know, can you explain uh again what what that means in terms of the the situation in Indoaccom where China is watching? We saw Mr.
▶ 1:16:28Rogers pretty powerful presentation in terms of the um the buildup that's happening in that part of the world. How does that align with the national defense strategy which was just put out by this administration in January?
▶ 1:16:40Well, sir, um first I want to echo uh your comments on the Ford strike group. Fantastic work by incredible sailors. Uh not just the Ford herself, but the other ships as well on a historic crews doing uh incredible work for for the nation.
▶ 1:17:00Excuse me. How does that balance with the national
▶ 1:17:02Yes, sir. H happy to answer the the way I think about this. The national security strategy and national defense strategy are frameworks, but a president will employ uh national force and power based on the political and and security situations that a president uh deems appropriate to use that military force. There's always tradeoffs in all of these things.
▶ 1:17:29Uh I I'm uh confident that the president always carefully considers these readiness trade-offs. Um and uh and I'm sure he has done so in this case based on uh based on the military options that we've presented with the associated risks and advice.
▶ 1:17:45Let's make a trade going after a regime that's weaker and more vulnerable than it has been in decades, which is quote unquote from from the defense strategies report. Uh just not in in my opinion in common sense. Gentleman's time's expired. As you can tell from the looking at the dis votes have been called. Uh so we are now going to stand in recess to the end of this vote. I expect it to take 20 to 25 minutes but we are now in recess.
▶ 1:44:32Okay, here we come back to order. Uh, Secretary, can you hear my my voice clearly? General, can you hear my microphone now? Okay.
▶ 1:44:40Yes, sir.
▶ 1:44:41Gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Turner, is Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secret Dr. Hegsath, um your written testimony on page 20 u includes a statement concerning the importance of FISA and section 702, which is incredibly timely because this body going to be voting uh today on 702, which could be expiring this week.
▶ 1:45:08Uh you state this vital tool keeps Americans safe, provides critical intelligence to our war fighters and is subject to a rigorous system of oversight by all three branches of government to guarantee the protection of the constitutional rights of the American people. Thought I'd give you a moment to expound on that because this is going to be very important because there's several people who right now in this body are going to be considering their support for 702's reauthorization.
▶ 1:45:35Well, thank you for that opportunity. Uh, Congressman, yes, this department strongly supports the reauthorization of FISA 702. And it is not hyperbole to say many of the most important missions we have executed could not have happened without, uh, the intelligence gathered through FISA 702. So, uh, we would urge members to support that so we can continue doing the good work of the American people.
▶ 1:45:58Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I appreciate your comments that Iran must never be permitted to obtain a nuclear weapon. Uh there has been many comments that have been made concerning allies who have not assisted or supported the effort. Uh General Kaine, there have been many allies who have been essential for us to be able to execute uh the functions necessary both for Midnight Hammer and for the current ongoing operation.
▶ 1:46:27Um, I'd like to ask you to speak for a moment about the essential aspect of the allies that are supporting the effort. There are bases that are necessary, our Ford operating facilities, both our allies in the mid Middle East, both our um NATO allies, those in Europe throughout.
▶ 1:46:50We would not be able to undertake this current operation without the use and support of facilities that we have in our bases in throughout NATO, Europe, and the Middle East. If you could for a moment expound on the the integral nature of our facilities that include those bases that are located within our allies.
▶ 1:47:16Well, Congressman, from a from a purely military standpoint, um allies and alliances are important. Um they allow us you you did a better job than I could on articulating the importance of access basing and overflight considerations. um you know who those allies are and the quality of those alliances or left our civilian leaders, but certainly we appreciate those uh allies who've helped us and assisted us along the way.
▶ 1:47:44General, you would you would describe them as having been essential.
▶ 1:47:49Uh yes, sir. Because that's it's very important. I mean, we want to make certain that you know our that we treat adversaries as adversaries and allies like allies, especially those that are Um the um the king was here yesterday and as he was speaking he um received a standing ovation when he implored this body to continue our support for Ukraine.
▶ 1:48:13In the um 2026 National Defense Strategy, it assesses Russia will be will remain a persistent manageable threat. It specifically identifies um Russia's uh continued threat to Ukraine and uh we have of course u the uh currently uh president the presidential continued draw down authority that can support Ukraine and also um
▶ 1:48:44the President Trump uh announced uh Pearl the prioritized Ukraine requirements list and in the FY2026 India there is the 400 million that is included in the European capacity building within the defense security cooperation.
▶ 1:49:01Um general the um the last time it went on the house floor with respect to funding for Ukraine u there was a vote in the house of over 300 members of the house that supported Ukraine. Could you please give us a description of some of the things currently that we're doing operationally to support Ukraine? Uh, Congressman, I a few of those are are probably left for classified session.
▶ 1:49:28Um, we continue through our uh security assistance group Ukraine to assist with some u information sharing matters. Yukon continues.
▶ 1:49:38You would describe it as continuous and ongoing and essential for Ukraine with US support.
▶ 1:49:43Sir, much of the relationship
▶ 1:49:45time's expired. Chair and I recognize gentleman from California, Mr. Gar Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, Mr. Secretary and General Kaine, let me begin by thanking the men and women of the United States military for their service and their bravery. I recognize that our service members have performed with extraordinary courage and tactical skill, and they've done incredible things that our country has asked them to.
▶ 1:50:11Their professionalism and selfless service are not in question and never have been. What is in question is the purposes and the strategic direction of this war. Mr. Hath, as Secretary of the Department of Defense, you are ultimately responsible for the conduct of the Iran war.
▶ 1:50:30Any unvarn unvarnished review of what is happening right now in the Middle East would reveal a geopolitical calamity, a strategic blunder resulting in worldwide economic crisis. The result of Trump's war of choice is a serious self-inflicted wound to America. It will take years and a new administration to recover from the grave damage to our standing in the world as well as our economy and our military.
▶ 1:51:00We must remember that 13 Americans have been killed in action, hundreds wounded, and thousands of civilians killed, including more than a hundred school children. The risk of this conflict was foreseeable. I'm certain that the Department of Defense knew that it was likely that in a war with Iran, Iran would create an international economic crisis by blocking the straight of Hamuz and thus stopping 20% of the world's oil.
▶ 1:51:29Was this existential threat Apparently not. During the 60 days of Trump's Iran war, critical munitions have been expended at an alarming rate, depleting magazine levels below what is thought necessary to hold China at bay. It will take years and tens of billions of dollars to restock.
▶ 1:51:53A significant part of the necessary navy and marine force in the Pacific has been removed and sent to support the Iran war. Our support of Ukraine has suffered as supplies and defense systems are diverted to the Iran war. America has lost irreplaceable aircraft, radar systems, and strategic bases have been shown to be vulnerable.
▶ 1:52:19The continued lengthy deployment of ships, equipment, and personnel has sacrificed readiness. We know what we have lost, but what have we gained? Let's consider that the regime in Thran is still intact with new and more radical leadership as are Iran's ballistic missile and drone as Iran as is Iran's ability to rebuild their military industries.
▶ 1:52:51Also, as is Iran's coordination with China, Russia, and North Korea, and Iran's ability to choke off global energy supplies, and their stockpile of highlyenriched uranium, which they only built after President Trump shredded President Obama's Iran deal in 2017.
▶ 1:53:16Secretary Hezath, you have been lying to the American public about this war from day one, and so has the president. You have misled the public about why we are at war. You and the president have offered everchanging reasons for this war. You've misled the public about the progress of the war.
▶ 1:53:38While the military has executed this war with tactical success, the strategy has been an astounding incompetence, doing immense economic damage to
▶ 1:53:50Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman,
▶ 1:53:53with the personal attack on the secretary, he should have an opportunity to respond.
▶ 1:53:57He certainly will when I finish, it's the gentleman's time. He can use it as he sees fit and add an extra 5 seconds to Mr. Gary Min's time.
▶ 1:54:06Thank you. You and the president offer everchanging reasons for the war. You've misled the public about the progress of the war. While the military has executed this war with tactical success, the strategy has been an outstanding example of incompetence. This war of choice is a political and economic disaster at every level. Despite the president's promise to lower the cost of living, gas prices are up 40% and inflation is soaring.
▶ 1:54:34so much for lowering the cost of living. The president has got himself and America stuck in the quagmire of another war in the Middle East. He's desperately trying to extricate himself from his own mistakes. It is in America's and indeed the world's interest that he succeed in that. I yield back. Gentleman yields back. Chair and I recognize a gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Whitman.
▶ 1:54:59Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to thank our witnesses for joining us today. General Kaine, Secretary Hicks, Mr. Hurst. Thank you so much. I want to go to a statement I've been making here for the last several years and that is we are in the most dangerous national security position that this world has been in since 1939. And we know that it's a critical effort that we undertake to make sure we can through the concept of peace through strength. Mr. Secretary, I'd like to start with you.
▶ 1:55:28We know that peace through strength has a number of uh tenants. I think the most important of those is presence. And we know that the United States has the Marine Corps Amphibious Ready Group, Marine Corps Expeditionary Unit that provides us that that presence. Uh we know there over 2,000 Marines and uh an an aircraft combat unit that are on board those those vessels and they let us do a number of different things. That's the crisis response team that gets to go around the world. Today as we speak, we have three ARGM muse that are deployed around the world. Unfortunately, that's an anomaly.
▶ 1:55:59It should be standard. Uh, Secretary Hegsth, the president and the combatant commanders need maximum flexibility to respond in multiple places at multiple times to combat and deter these these threats. Um, I just want to get your perspective on your goal to make sure we have a persistent 3.0 Argu presence and to look at how are we going to make sure through our ship building plans that we assure that we have the adequate number of amphibs that are being built.
▶ 1:56:28I think that number is probably around right around 40. And then what are we going to do to make sure too that the ASBO the operational availability is going to be at the level where we can maintain an argu.0 with the effort we have to put in to maintain these ships.
▶ 1:56:43So thank you for the question. The substantive question um ultimately we support 3.0 argue there that presence right now gives us a lot of flexibility
▶ 1:56:52and this budget supports moving in that direction to ensure that u this administration and future administrations have that kind of uh strategic flexibility with the incredible capabilities the argu provides we saw it in southern spear we saw it on on the Maduro raid we saw it we see it right now it's a persistent capability so uh I think you'll find our ship building uh cap investments to meet that as well but but if I may
▶ 1:57:17sure Yeah, I didn't get a chance. I didn't see a question in the statement from the congressman. I I hope you appreciate how reckless it is. When I said reckless, feckless, and defeist of congressional Democrats at the beginning, uh that came after watching you say the same thing on CNN this morning, a quagmire. My generation served in a quagmire in Iraq and Afghanistan. Years and years of of nebulous missions and utopian nation building that led us to nothing.
▶ 1:57:44What we have right now The way you stain the troops when you tell them two months in, two months in, Congressman, you should know better. Shame on you. Calling this a quagmire, two months in. The effort, what they've undertaken, what they've succeeded, the success on the battlefield that could create strategic opportunities, the courage of a president to confront a nuclear Iran, and you call it a quagmire, handing propaganda to our enemies. Shame on you for that statement. And statements like that are reckless to our troops.
▶ 1:58:14Don't say I support the troops on one hand and then a two-month mission is a quagmire. That's a false equivalation. Who you cheering for here? Who you pulling for? Our troops are doing incredible work. They've done incredible things for the entirety of this mission and achieved incredible battlefield successes. And you sit there and go on TV for your clickbait about quagmires. It undermines the mission.
▶ 1:58:37Your your your hatred for President Trump blinds blinds you to the truth of the success of this mission and the historic stakes that the president is addressing which the American people support. Iran's been at war with us for 47 years. You want to talk about a forever war? For two months, this president has stared them down. He's going to get a better deal than anyone ever has and ensure that Iran never has a nuclear weapon. I know the American people support that mission despite your loose talk and words like quagmire.
▶ 1:59:08Thank you.
▶ 1:59:09Thank you, Mr. Secretary. General Kane, I want to quickly go to you. We know all about the need for exquisite platforms, but we know if we're going to close the gap with our pacing threats, we have to make sure we have those ex those expendable and attitudable platforms. And we know those nation capabilities are key. and we have to be able to spin them up quickly because that's the fastest way for us to again deter by peace through strength.
▶ 1:59:31Give us your perspective on how you see the urgency of getting that capacity uh not only in place but getting that ability to go to scale and get those capabilities in the hands of our war fighters.
▶ 1:59:40Sure. I think it's uh I think it's critical and when I look at um what OSW above us is doing and the deputy secretary as well as secretary Duffy and frankly the national and defense industrial bases all rallying around the need to scale along with the new entrance that are out there who are coming and bringing products to the joint force. A key is capacity
▶ 2:00:04expired here and I recognize a gentleman from New Jersey Mr. Norcross. Thank you, chairman. I'd like to thank the witnesses for being here today. Mr. Secretary, it's well known that our defense industrial base and maritime industrial base has decline greatly over time. It's the shipyards. It's many of the things that you already spoke about. In my community, we used to have three shipyards, 40,000 workers.
▶ 2:00:29We've lost that critical job skills earn and 40,000 people who know how to do it. And quite frank frankly, most of it went overseas because it was cheaper. Well, cheaper doesn't buy the security we need for our industrial base.
▶ 2:00:45I championed a provision in the 24 NDAA entitled enhanced domestic content requirement for major acquisition programs had to do with our industrial base making things here in America.
▶ 2:01:00Long before this administration came in, the goal was to strengthen our supply chains and have that critical uh oversight, push for greater investments, much of what you're doing now on these major defense acquisition programs. we passed that in a bipartisan manner because we knew that this was critical and things can happen. Lo and behold, here we are.
▶ 2:01:28There was a reporting requirement in that that's calls on you, the Secretary of Defense, to establish an information repository, issue rules, create a fallback process to govern the Department of Defense. We wanted to better understand much of what is being done here, but it's not being reported back to us. I sent to your office on January 8th, followed up on February 4th.
▶ 2:01:54We're years overdue on this report that will give us insight onto how we're addressing it. We hear what you're saying, but can you commit that we will get that report to us in the next 30 days? Um, unless Jay has additional details, I'll make sure we look into it. Whatever we can get to you as rapidly as possibly, we will. Um, we'll also check with the new Navy leadership and make sure they're complying as rapidly as possible with every aspect that could apply to ship building.
▶ 2:02:24That's been our focus on the Navy side.
▶ 2:02:27It's not just ship building. Major acquisition programs across the board. This is incredibly important and they are ignoring this and 30 days is being generous certainly. Second issue is uh you talk about championing the American worker and how important this is. Yet in the memo in April 9th, you terminate all the collective bargaining agreements across the DoD, taking away from hundreds of thousands of workers at DoD their collective bargaining rights that they voted for.
▶ 2:02:58There was nothing to indicate there were any issues with any of the bargaining agreements. yet you decided to take away from them. Over the last few years, we have increased the wages for those war fighters. Incredibly important. This year up to 7%. Yet on the other side of this, you talk about supercharging the defense industrial base. We are in this. How do you go and say yes, we support the war fighters.
▶ 2:03:25They can't do their job unless we are building things that they can use. Yet no evidence to prove that these collective bargaining agreements were a problem anywhere across the Department of Defense under Democrat and Republican administrations. How do you kind of square that circle that you care about this yet you take away their voice on the job?
▶ 2:03:48Well, certainly, sir, the great workers that that uh whether they're contractors or DoD civilians that that do the important work for us, the great ones are going to stay. And we've invested more in merit bonuses for civilians than any administration previous. So if you're doing great work, you're going to stay and you're going to have even more opportunities. But with our ear to the ground in those shipyards and other factory floors, uh there were issues with collective bargaining which led to restrictions to the workforce and our ability to move faster.
▶ 2:04:13And in that case, you made the decision to provide additional flexibility.
▶ 2:04:17You didn't take it away from the shipyard workers. You took away from Department of Defense employers where there hasn't been any issues. Let's be clear. Those are independent contractors and they have their collective bargain agreements. The ones that work for you,
▶ 2:04:31the ones that work for us should be at will like anybody else based on their performance and and if they're performing well, which I'm sure they are as you've represented, they will have a job at the department.
▶ 2:04:41So where is the issue that you took away their collective bargaining rights? Why did you do it if it wasn't a problem?
▶ 2:04:47Well, I I stated up front it has been a problem. There are plenty of cases whether it's conf or inside our own department where collective bar collective bargaining had led to arrangements and agreements that minimize the efficiency and effectiveness of employees at the point of their impact. That's what we were focusing on and that's why we made the change which we very much stand behind.
▶ 2:05:05Well, I yield back. Gentleman yields back here and I recognize the gentle lady from New York, Miss Stefonic.
▶ 2:05:11Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary Heg Seth, I appreciate the department and the administration's focus on expansion and innovation in the defense industrial base that's particularly important for emerging technologies. For years on this committee, my office has led the effort to ban the procurement of Chinese Communist drones, which pose a significant national security threat.
▶ 2:05:31And last year, after years of work, this committee finally passed my countering CCP drones act or section 1709 of the NDAA, which was fully implemented in December. How does the FY27 budget scale domestic production and deployment of drone systems to ensure the US has the decisive advantage against our US
▶ 2:05:54Well, thank you for the question. First of all, thank you for your work on that. incred critically important when you look under the hood of the ways in which China is trying to use critical elements of of our defense industrial base and supply chain against us or capabilities in the future that could hamstring us with options for a future president. It's staggering. So drones was is one that not only have we recognized but thanks to your leadership and the leadership of others, we are supercharging in this budget u conservatively 54 billion in drone and drone dominance and counter UAS.
▶ 2:06:24Uh Jay just slid me a piece of paper. If you add it all up, it could be closer to 74 billion. Uh we started a defense autonomous working group, autonomous warfare group, excuse me, to focus on this, but we're going to do even more. We will shortly announce a subunified command autonomous warfare. Uh drones are so central to the future of warfare and where we get them from that we have to be able to both make the exquisite ones better than anybody else and also the attritable swarm.
▶ 2:06:50uh and then the ability to defeat them ahead of our adversary, learning from battlefields like Ukraine and Epic Fury. So, thank you for your leadership. It is front and center in this budget.
▶ 2:06:59I very much appreciate all that the department is doing under your leadership. One of the concerns I have is recent reporting indicates that while DJI, which is a communist Chinese drone company, is prohibited from receiving new FCC authorizations. There are still DJI products such as the DJI Avada 360 widely available in the US through major retailers. These received FCC authorizations before my provision in the NDAA was fully implemented.
▶ 2:07:27So my question to you is, we need to close this loophole to protect our national security. Will you commit to working with this committee in my office to ensure that these products that pose a significant risk to our national security are no longer permitted given the evident threat CCP drones pose to US national security? Congressman, uh, yes, the department will commit to working with your staff and looking at that loophole which we are aware of.
▶ 2:07:52And I I missed in my first response, of course, that 54 billion is Americanmade drone dominance. Yeah, that is exactly where they need to be and that's our focus.
▶ 2:08:02Great. Another emerging technology that's very important and has a strong tie to my district is quantum computing. China continues to invest heavily in quantum computing sensing and secure communications for military advantage. Um, I represent Rome Air Force Research Lab, which is a hub of research when it comes to quantum. Secretary Hegsth, how does the budget proposal position the US to maintain leadership in operationally relevant quantum technologies?
▶ 2:08:30The country that dominates in quantum will dominate the future in C2, in comms, in every every way that we fight. And so this makes the maximal investment possible here at home to ensure that quantum compute and working across the inter agency. By the way, this is not just a DO issue. This is an inter agency issue. Uh to ensure that we've got the ability to scale and compute outmputee adversaries who are racing for the same same code.
▶ 2:08:57General Kaine, throughout my time in Congress, I've pushed for the department to optimize its approach to quantum and develop a strategic roadmap. In your opinion, which quantum capability areas offer the most immediate benefit to the joint force and should be priority investments moving
▶ 2:09:14Probably some of the work in crypto and quantum to make sure we can see, sense, understand, defeat, and protect our own stuff. So, that's where I'm most interested in it right now. Ma'am,
▶ 2:09:24great. And I also want to use my remaining time. I just want to invite both of you to visit Fort Drum, home of the 10th Mountain Division, the most deployed division in the US Army since 9/11. In the first Trump administration, I had the honor of hosting President Trump where he signed the NDAA in my district and it's been a privilege to represent them. So, encourage you to visit that uh installation before the end of this year. Thank you very much and I yield back.
▶ 2:09:47Gentle yields back. Chair now recognizes a gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr.
▶ 2:09:51Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, you and I agree that Iran is a national security threat to us and our allies. Now, earlier you called us feckless for questioning your war. Do you think Congress was smart or feckless when it failed to ask tough questions of the Bush administration and gave them a blank check for Iraq?
▶ 2:10:10Well, if you're trying to compare this war to the Iraq,
▶ 2:10:13I'm just asking if you think it was the first one to call a stupid war, then it's a false comparison.
▶ 2:10:18Okay. Well, probably a good idea to ask tough questions. So, let me just ask you a few questions. Did you advise the president that we should attack Iran?
▶ 2:10:26Uh we were first of all in this position in the cabinet. We never talk about what we would advise the president to do or
▶ 2:10:32Do you think the president or deserves
▶ 2:10:34I've been in every meeting chairman and everybody else has the secretary. I'm asking the question and he got every every perspective possible when it came.
▶ 2:10:42I'm just asking what your perspective is. Are you afraid to take ownership of this? Do you think it was a good idea or not? my when I as I've consulted the president, do I think it's a good idea to confront a nuclear bomb in the hands of the imagine what the world would look like right now if Iran had a nuclear
▶ 2:10:56Okay, so let's just just imagine which by the way the Obama deal including the first Trump administration prevented them from having a nuclear weapon. So listen, how is this war going? Do you think we're winning
▶ 2:11:09militarily on the battlefield? It's been an astounding military success.
▶ 2:11:12But are we winning the war?
▶ 2:11:14Okay. Okay. So, do you call Iran closing the straight of Hormuz winning?
▶ 2:11:18Well, I would say the blockade that we hold that doesn't allow anything to come in or out of Iranian ports always.
▶ 2:11:25So, we've blockaded their blockade. So, they blockaded us and then we blockaded their blockade. That's like saying tag gurit or you know if President Madison had said, "Well, the British just burned down Washington, but don't worry, we're going to burn it down as well." Chairman Kaine, did the military have plans for the idea that Iran might blockade the strait?
▶ 2:11:46Sir, thanks for uh thanks for the question. Um I'll uh I'll answer it uh this way. You know, in this job, I have to maintain trust with a variety of of of constituents to the president. If the
▶ 2:12:00sir we as always my point in this is as I explain the role my point in this is we always offer a full range of military options that are carefully considered with the associated risks with those options and the considerations therein.
▶ 2:12:16So Mr. Secretary did you consider this Of course, this department has looked at all aspects of this risk and this department mind sweepers the only mind sweepers we had in the Gulf to Singapore weeks before the war started.
▶ 2:12:30We have lots of capabilities that you may or may not be aware aware of at the classified level to deal with to deal
▶ 2:12:36By the way, would the Trump class battleships have helped with this?
▶ 2:12:39You're talking about a prospective future battleship which we welcome in the fleet.
▶ 2:12:44Okay. So, you're supportive of the of the battleships?
▶ 2:12:47Yes, sir.
▶ 2:12:48Okay. Um, how much has Iran profited from your administration lifting the sanctions on Iran when you started this war?
▶ 2:12:57I can tell you Iran is financially devastated right now in the Treasury about 14 billion economic fury. Uh, they're at a point where between the blockade and what we've done to them militarily, remember they don't have a navy, they can't contest the blockade.
▶ 2:13:10Uh, between what we've done to them militarily and financially, they're at a place where they have very few options. How many Chinese missiles can they buy for $14 billion? Does that sound like
▶ 2:13:21Um, they're not we're ensuring and they're not buying Chinese missiles.
▶ 2:13:25Okay. You know, at the end of the day, this also has a cost to us. If you if if let's say this war costs hundred billion, I mean, you've already said, give us more time. It's only been two months. It could go on for 20 years like Iraq and Afghanistan. Let's just say it cost a hundred billion dollars. What is that to the average American taxpayer? Do you have any idea? Well, unlike foolish previous administrations, it won't go on for for years and decades. But let's just say, it's hard to imagine how they've allowed those things to happen. You were a part of that answer to that. So was I. And I never
▶ 2:13:55I'm just asking if you know what your war cost the average American taxpayer.
▶ 2:13:59What does the cost of Iran having a nuclear weapon that they wield?
▶ 2:14:02I'm just asking if you know the cost of the average American $600. So for for the American taxpayers out there, my constituents, some of the constituents you wanted to represent in Minnesota, I'm just wondering if they have an extra 600 bucks lying around to pay for your war. I think that's just a just a question that we ought to ask. Now, quickly, on March 13th in a press conference, you said we will give them no quarter, no mercy. In order for no quarter or no survivors is a war crime under the Gene Geneva Conventions, you understand that's murder.
▶ 2:14:31Do you stand by that statement? Uh the Department of War fights to win and we ensure that our war fighters have the rules of engagement necessary to be as effectively clear. You call Democratic members of Congress to be tried for sedition for reminding our troops to follow the law. But when you tell them to commit a war crime, you stand by yourself
▶ 2:14:49for insinuating the laws that we're giving them are times and I recognize gentleman from Tennessee, Dr. Dejar Lee.
▶ 2:14:56Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I thank our witnesses for being here today. And I'd like to thank you for uh your commitment to our advancement in space, Golden Dome, and nuclear modernization, all which are critical. And also uh I understand we're going to start uh some reproduction of the MQ9 Reaper drones, which uh you Mr.
▶ 2:15:17Secretary and and Miss Secretary share my great state of Tennessee and we know the 118th Airwing of the National Guard operate very field and conduct many of these missions and and and they do so with great precision. And so thank you for that. Uh Secretary Hegth, you commissioned as an infantry officer in the US Army National Guard in 2003. You've been deployed to Iraq, Afghanistan, Guantanamo Bay.
▶ 2:15:40Uh you have been awarded two bronze stars, the combat infantrymen badge, joint commenation medals, two army commenation medals among other recognitions. You have seen military actions from both an operational and service member perspective. Have you ever seen operations with the scope and scale and complexity of Midnight Hammer, Operation Absolute Resolve, and Operation Epic Fury? Thank you for the question, Mr. Congressman.
▶ 2:16:08Uh, not only have I not seen missions like that, but if you ask if you earnestly go into our formations right now and you talk to colonels and majors and staff sergeants and two star generals and you ask them about the environment of our military right now and its capabilities right now compared to under the Biden administration under Obama, they will tell you it is night and day. Even the even the ranking member acknowledged that the troops performed incredibly well over the past 15 months and have demonstrated to the world.
▶ 2:16:37These are not new troops in a lot of cases. These are the same troops with new leadership under President Trump who gives them every authority under a department that ensures they have what they need. I have operators looking at me saying for the first time ever, we have everything we need to accomplish the mission both in equipment and in authorities. That matters when you go 37 hours around the world for midnight hammers.
▶ 2:16:59That matters when you go downtown uh in in Venezuela and grab the indicted dictator of a country in the middle of the night in the most fortified location. That matters at the outset of the Iran conflict. It matters during Operation Rough Rider, which there's a reason why the Houthies aren't on the in this fight right now because they experienced 50 days of the American military under President Trump. That matters uh in the Caribbean and our fight against designated terror organizations.
▶ 2:17:25This military is unleashed and the morale is at a level that this country has not seen for decades and decades because of the leadership of President Trump and because this war department allows them to get back to basics. No more distractions, no more debris. It's simple accountability, training standards, lethality, and they respond to it.
▶ 2:17:45And it's that response that's manifest in highly and historic successful military operations led by our incredible joint force uh who are are grateful to have a commander-in-chief that has their back.
▶ 2:17:56I can tell you for that our nation, myself and and all of us are incredibly grateful. Secretary Hegath and General Kaine with your vision and steadfast commitment to our nation's service members. You have both overseen the beginning of a generational transformation of our armed services.
▶ 2:18:11This budget request reflects that commitment by building and sustaining our defense industrial base, increasing service member pay, housing and benefits, robust funding for Golden Dome Missile Defense and Space Capabilities, and the emphasis on the peace through strength doctrine outlined in the National Defense Strategy.
▶ 2:18:29Based on the Defense Department's recent track record of successful missions, can you share some examples of military action that illustrate exactly how your leadership and vision for the Department of War is translating the peace through strength doctrine into an operational reality and what psychological impact that may have on our nearpeer adversaries such as China and Russia. And I'd like to get both yours and General Kane's perspective if you can take 30 seconds
▶ 2:18:54I'll keep it brief. Uh reestablishing deterrence was one of the core pillars of what we set out to do. After Afghanistan, after October 7th, after the war in Ukraine, after Lloyd Austin went awall for a week and no one seemed to care, the world took notice of that. And through the actions we've taken swiftly that I just laid out, the world has recognized that American power is back and and the willingness to utilize it shows that we can achieve peace through strength.
▶ 2:19:18And General Kane, in terms of our
▶ 2:19:21yes, sir. Um, you know, when we look at the totality of actions that we've done over the last year, one thing leaps out at me that I think is clearly and unambiguously seen by our adversaries or those that may consider it, and that's our ability to integrate and synchronize a whole range of capabilities that we have in the joint force. Um, information, cyber, you know, deception, uh, jamming, uh, air power, sea power, land power, etc.
▶ 2:19:51And I think that that ability and I'm so proud of our joint force those young
▶ 2:19:57gentleman's time's expired chair now recognize a gentleman from California Mr. Carbajal. Thank you Mr. Chair and thank you General Kaine uh Mr. Hexath and hers for being here today. I associate myself with the comments of ranking member Smith and uh Mr. Garmendy so that I won't repeat a lot of what has been said. Mr. Hexath. I recently realized that we have something in common. I'm also a fan of Pulp Fiction.
▶ 2:20:26And no, the movie is not an accurate portrayal of the Bible. You know what I'm talking about. This president and his administration has have claimed to be the most transparent of all time. With that in mind, I love to get some straightforward straightforward answers Some estimates show that the Trump administration's war of choice in Iran is costing taxpayers around $1 billion every day. In addition to spending taxpayer money on a war they don't want.
▶ 2:20:56It is also driving up costs. The cost of gas, while the cost of living is skyrocketing under this administration's policies. To me, and I assume to the American people, it is unclear why we started this war, how it will end, and what anyone gained from it. Mr. Hexath, about how much money has been spent on this war to date, and how much more do you anticipate spending?
▶ 2:21:25Well, as our comproller laid out, the estimate is less than 25 billion at this point as far as an expenditure. And the question I would ask this committee is what is it worth to ensure that Iran never gets a nuclear weapon considering the radical ambitions of that regime. I mean almost every member of this deis at some point has said whether it was
▶ 2:21:43Thank you for your answer. I I'll proceed with my next nuclear weapon. Thank you for your answer. President Trump is the one that's willing to make sure it doesn't happen. Supposedly, we had taken care of the nuclear capability last time around and now this war we're at it again because obviously we said we did but we did it
▶ 2:22:00in a way that wait I want to reclaim my time.
▶ 2:22:05We know that the cost of oil and gas has gone up as a direct result of this war and the American people are feeling that pain at the pump. In an attempt to alleviate the high price of gas caused directly by this president, he lifted sanctions on Russian oil. The way I see it, this is a massive gift to Putin and Russia's struggling economy. Mr.
▶ 2:22:28Hexath, is there any concern that easing sanctions against Russia will allow Putin to continue funding Russia's illegal war against Ukraine? Uh well, we've seen Russia's and Putin's inability to make effective battlefield gains, just like their inability to defend the Maduro regime with the billions of dollars of systems the Russians sent to Venezuela in order to defend him, which were defeated in 15 minutes. So, Russia's military capabilities are no match for hours.
▶ 2:22:59And you don't believe the sanctions is helping Russia?
▶ 2:23:03Well, we have the best energy team in the planet uh at the at it's just a yes or no. We're going to ensure that
▶ 2:23:09this is not deja vu. It's a simple yes or no.
▶ 2:23:11Understand the energy dominance that this administration has unleashed.
▶ 2:23:14All right. Well, I'll proceed to my next question. Last week, it was announced that the Department of Defense is no longer requiring service members to get their annual flu shot. Now, this is an easy one for you. It's a softball. Don't screw it up. The rational was to, and I quote, restore freedom to our joint force. This has been a requirement since because it is an effective at preventing the spread of flu among our troops.
▶ 2:23:43It's not some new woke requirement as you like to lean on for much of your rhetoric. This decision is actively making our military less safe and less pre Mr. Hexath at this time there are plans are there plans to remove the mandatory requirement of other vaccinations like measles ms and polio.
▶ 2:24:08Uh we made very clear in our announcement that it applies to uh service members having a choice as it pertains to the flu vaccine.
▶ 2:24:17Don't you think that's a little No, I think uh allowing well-informed Americans who serve our country to make a choice is not reckless. And commanders will still have latitude, say for a submarine or something else to make a decision for a unit about whether it could be mandatory in a particular c circumstance. But overall, our troops have earned the right to be able to choose about something like that related to their health. Mr. Hexth, I stand by what I said last time you were here.
▶ 2:24:45You were incompetent then, you're incompetent now, and you're the gift that keeps on giving when it comes to incompetence. With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Gentleman yields back. Chair.
▶ 2:24:56Other than that, I'm doing gentleman from Mississippi, Mr. Kelly.
▶ 2:25:00Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary, don't you think it was extremely reckless to mandate COVID vaccines for the healthiest and most unlikely to get CO and kicked them out of the service if they did not comply with a uh although legal uh crazy order from the previous administration? Don't you think it was reckless to require that those soldiers and marines and sailors had to take that COVID vaccine?
▶ 2:25:28Congressman, thank you for the question. Not only do I think it was reckless, but we point out the nature of the emergency uh and lack of actual data on it. We think it wasn't may not have been legal. And as a result, we're working very hard to ensure that any service member who was pushed out is brought back in. If they were forcibly pushed out with back pay and rank and everything that comes with it, those uh soldiers and troops of conscience who had to make that choice, we think are the best troops in our force. Listen, I'm grateful that we have two great National Guardsmen sitting at that table today.
▶ 2:25:59As a longtime serving guardsman who just retired, I'm so proud of y'all and what you mean for our total force. It's not a National Guard. It's not a reserve. It's not an army. It's not a navy. It is a total force. And thank y'all for recognizing that. I just want to go back to some of the Iran stuff. I don't know, maybe they're in a different world than I'm living in, but from where I live since 1979, Iran has been at war with the United States, although we refuse to acknowledge it.
▶ 2:26:25Uh whether that's Hezbollah, whether that's the Houthis, uh whether that is Hamas, whether that is trying to build nuclear weapons exporting terror everywhere. I know for a fact when I was in Iraq both tours that EFPs made by Iranians killed our troops.
▶ 2:26:45I know for a fact that many of the munitions I know for a fact many of the militians militias in Iran that were Shia base were there to attack Americans at the willing knowledge of the Iranian government. Do you agree they've been at war with us and are still with at war with us and the world since 1979?
▶ 2:27:08Of course. Uh for 47 years from Beirut to Baghdad, uh Iran has sought the most dangerous weapons in the world to try to achieve death to America. And if they were to get the most dangerous weapon in the world, a nuclear weapon, they would most certainly use it. Which is why this is at the level of seriousness that President Trump was willing to address it. And that's what I think so many in this body misrepresent. North Korea is the lesson. Everybody thought North Korea shouldn't have a weapon.
▶ 2:27:37Under the Clinton administration, they gathered so many ballistic missiles that their ballistic missile shield allowed them to blackmail the region and the world to say, "We're going to get a nuke and you can't do anything about it." Under this administration, them weakened by the 12-day war and what happened with Midnight Hammer.
▶ 2:27:52president made a bold choice on behalf of the American people to say never will will Iran with their view of death to America and death to Israel have a nuclear weapon because if they have it they'll use it and he's he's taken that bold action in a way I think the American people when they understand the nature of that threat and they do uh they support it uh Chairman Kaine wow I've been around a long time can any other military in the history of the world pull off Venezuela midnight hammer an epic
▶ 2:28:22fury the way that our great warriors that defend and project power for our nation. Could are you aware of any other nation in the history of the world that could have done that?
▶ 2:28:33I'm not sir. Um and I remain very proud of the joint force. I'll also say we're a learning organization and we're going to continue to look at the things that go right in any operations that we're tasked to do and we're going to get better every day. So we do not want to sit on the successes and assume future successes. We owe it to the nation uh and to the citizens to constantly improve no matter how well uh something goes. So I'm incredibly proud of the joint force.
▶ 2:29:02That said, I'm even more proud when they come back after that. They go into a team room and they start debriefing to make sure that we do it better next time, whatever it may be.
▶ 2:29:11And and my final point, I just want to talk about what a stroke of genius it was. is uh greater than I would have thought to blockade the ports of Iran. And that blow economically to their entire economy and to their leadership and everything else. It's going to take a little bit of time to play out. But that was so smart because it is more effective than any bombs. And those bombs were effective in Midnight Hammer. They continue to be.
▶ 2:29:36But until we kill their will to create a nuclear weapon, they will always be a nuclear threat because they've advanced far enough along. But that blockade was so important and it amazes me now we're crying about high gas prices when they were $2 a gallon more uh just four years ago or five years ago under the previous administration. With that I yield back.
▶ 2:29:56Gentleman yields back. Chair now recognizes the gentleman from California Mr. Con.
▶ 2:30:00Thank you Mr. Chairman. Secretary HGET tomorrow is two months since the war has begun. You've testified that it was 25 billion in cost in terms of the munitions we used and what we paid for it. But when you add to that the damage that was done to our bases and today's dollars for buying replacement munitions and replacement aircrafts, what has the total cost been over the last 60 days?
▶ 2:30:28That number right now reflects the total cost that we're seeing
▶ 2:30:31including buying in today's dollars the new uh weapons and replacements and including the damage there. That's your
▶ 2:30:38If there's adjustments to that, I would I would defer to the comproller on that. And how much are you seeing in terms of are you asking in terms of supplemental funding just for the Iran uh mission from this committee?
▶ 2:30:50If if if and when a supplemental is
▶ 2:30:53the majority of it would not just be for would not be for
▶ 2:30:57Iran munitions related to the entirety of what we want to get done.
▶ 2:31:01A number what what would you submit? What do
▶ 2:31:04it would be within the on Iran? It would be less than 25 billion, but there's a lot more we would ask for beyond just
▶ 2:31:10you're saying it's 25 billion. Okay, I would just if you come back, you want to revise those numbers because all the experts are disagreeing with you when it comes to today's dollars and damage, but you can revise it. How much did it cost American taxpayers in terms of the strike to the Iranian school where kids were killed? Do you have that number in terms of the missiles we used as I've said that uh unfortunate situation remains under investigation.
▶ 2:31:34You don't know how investigation, but I wouldn't tie a cost to that to anything.
▶ 2:31:39It's a reasonable question. No, sir. I mean, our taxpayer money was going there. Do you know how much it will cost Americans in terms of their increased cost in gas and food over the next year because of the Iran war?
▶ 2:31:52I would simply ask you what the cost is of an Iranian nuclear bomb.
▶ 2:31:55I'm going to give you that opportunity.
▶ 2:31:57I would simply ask you what the You're playing got questions about domestic things. I'm not
▶ 2:32:01You're asking You're saying it's a gotcha question to ask what it's going to be in terms of the increase.
▶ 2:32:06Why won't you answer what it costs to to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear bomb? give you that, sir. But let me What would it cost? What would you pay to ensure Iran doesn't get a nuclear
▶ 2:32:14Do you What would you pay?
▶ 2:32:15I reclaim my time. Do you not know? You had no one do the analysis of what the increased cost of gas and food on the American people are going to be.
▶ 2:32:23What is the cost of Iran holding that straight at issue with nuclear weapons?
▶ 2:32:27It's $631 billion, which means it's an increase of $5,000 a year for American households. Now, let me give you this point. You're saying that your operation is preventing a nuclear Iran. Will you acknowledge that there is an economic cost to the American people for doing what you believe is necessary to make Iran uh denuclear? Will you acknowledge the economic cost?
▶ 2:32:52We have an incredible economic team that's managing this better than what the previous administration did to our economy. What the previous administration did with inflation, you know what's up? and you're going to lecture this administration about the economy.
▶ 2:33:07You know what is upsetting to me? You didn't even do the analysis on how much it's costing the American people. It's one thing if you said, "Okay, it cost the American people $5,000, but we think it's worth it. Uh that's what we've done in World War II and other wars. Here's what it costs. You got to pay for it." You don't even know what the average American is paying. You don't know what we paid in terms of the missiles that hit the Iranian school. You don't know what we're paying in terms of gas. You don't know what we're paying in terms of food. Your 25 billion number is totally off. It's the incompetence.
▶ 2:33:37It's the incompetence. Let me ask you this. Certainly. Maybe here we'll find agreement. There was still 440 pounds of lowenriched uranium, correct? When President Obama after the JCPOA, is that
▶ 2:33:50Um, the amounts and types are
▶ 2:33:53Okay. Will you acknowledge that there were 970 pounds of uranium enriched uh after Trump to up the JCPOA?
▶ 2:34:03The JCPOA was a terrible deal that allowed Iran a path to a nuclear
▶ 2:34:07bomb. You you deal with vague platitudes. I'm asking you about numbers like you don't know what gas costs, you don't know what food costs, you don't know what the operation costs. You know, I get sound bites, but how about numbers? Do you know how much the enriched uranium was after you ripped up the JCPOA? Trump did.
▶ 2:34:26I'll give you a number. I know that as was stated by uh early on, the price of gas is twice as expensive in California, your home state, as anywhere else in the country, because of the horrible policies your state pursued.
▶ 2:34:35You know what it used to be that that type of stuff worked and then you started to lose the people that you campaigned you wanted to be for because you said you won't get us into bad wars. You said you wouldn't you would bring down the prices. You know what I'm sad for? I'm sad for all the people who voted for Trump. I'm sad for them because you've betrayed them. You've betrayed a lot of that MAGA base. And you know who knows that? JD Vance knows that time recognizes gentleman from Nebraska, Mr. Bacon.
▶ 2:35:05Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank all three of you for being here today.
▶ 2:35:09It's a real privilege to be a part of this committee. Uh we are the most bipartisan committee out of 20 in Congress. We have a tradition of voting on NDAAS with large large majorities year after year. And it's important not to be a Republican first in here or a Democrat first. We're Americans trying to ensure that our country is well defended. And in that spirit, I the operations in Iran. I served 30 years in the Air Force.
▶ 2:35:35We were attacked repeatedly by proxy groups from Iran on every deployment I was on. They were the number one threat where I was located. I've lost friends like at Cobar Towers. Iran with a nuclear weapon would have been an ex existential threat to our country. And if they had a missile that could hit New York, they would have done it. They would have done it two months ago. So, I support our operations there. I think it was good that we got Maduro out.
▶ 2:35:59You know, I I would say it would be important to get the representative government that duly won their election there and not good to replace one dictator with another dictator, but Maduro was bad for their country. And I support our 5% GDP spending. uh there's no way to modernize our nuclear force, sixth generation fighters, take care of our men and women in uniform without being at 5% GDP. But also in the spirit, I I share a bipartisan concern of the firings that we've seen at the Pentagon.
▶ 2:36:27Four of the six service chiefs, for example, the Coast Guard, we we had a huge bipartisan majority here that had confidence in the Army Chief of Staff and the Secretary of Navy. And I would just point out it may be constitutionally right. You have the constitution right to do these things but it doesn't make it right or wise. Now my first question is is dealing with the housing allowance. Something I've been working for the last two or three years.
▶ 2:36:52Our housing allowance is underpaying people in certain areas and the department and it hasn't started under this administration. It's been going going on for a while. They take out 5% of the housing allowance. They send it to other needs. But that means we're underpaying our servicemen and women living off base by 5%. So we tried to fix it with a $2.9 billion line item to fix housing allowance. But that money was moved. So I just Mr.
▶ 2:37:17Secretary, could you tell us how we're going to fix this because we have a shortfall in housing allowance and we tried to fix it out of here and I'd like to get it fixed.
▶ 2:37:27Congressman, I agree with you. I think that is precisely the kind of quality of life issue that's been ignored time and time again. uh oftentimes with good intentions of trying to do some trade-off with something else. But I I mentioned the 7% pay increase. That's just for junior enlisted. It's 6% from you know E6 to 03 and it's 5% from 04 all the way up. It's but closing that gap.
▶ 2:37:51Uh Triricare reimbursement is a big one we're going to look well if if we reimburse Triricare lower than Medicare then the no one wants to take Triricare and now you don't have a real network for service members. So those places where we've pinched pennies to try to ek out additional budget space have really hurt service members. So we're I I'm committed to working with you on that to to close that gap and ensure that folks can live where they are asked to serve because they can afford housing.
▶ 2:38:18I think this already been addressed to a degree, but I just want to emphasize we did put $400 million in for Ukraine. I ask you to execute it. It's important for most of us in here. It has overwhelming support. Also, I'm the chair of the Baltic Security Caucus, and we've put money in for the Baltic Security Initiative. These people love America. They love freedom more than any where I've ever been, and they need us. They're on the front lines with Russia. Mike, I have a question for the chairman.
▶ 2:38:46So, we did 29 years of of the nuclear alert, airborne alert, the looking glass mission. In 1991, we turned that off because the Cold War turned to our favor. I think we're back to where we were at. Russia's a threat. China's building a nuclear force to match ours. I think we need a looking glass, too, and restore that nuclear command and control survivability that gives us deterrence. Russia, China needs to know no matter what they do, we can launch those 400 ICBMs.
▶ 2:39:17What's your vision for the looking glass to the the follow on? Well, sir, as you know, um right now we're looking at all three legs of the nuclear triad to make sure that that most uh critical backs stop on our nation's most important day is reliable, redundant, uh and and workable. And so, um we we'll we'll take a look at that. I know the team already deep in analysis on all the from NC3 to the to the end state.
▶ 2:39:44Um, but what I what I want you to know is the most important thing is the ability to execute if we had to and we can.
▶ 2:39:52You know, for 29 years, we had a plane airborne with a general on board
▶ 2:39:55and it gave the Pentagon, the White House, Strahan the assurance that we had a backup.
▶ 2:40:01I think we're back to the future and I appreciate your look at it.
▶ 2:40:05I just flew with them and they were doing great. Gentleman's time's expired. I recognize gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. Keading.
▶ 2:40:11Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to talk briefly about the current US doctrine conduct of the administration in a particular event and and a series of events actually. As everybody in the dis and the witness table uh is aware, the department of defense law of war manual specifies that any order to kill shipwrecked persons in an illegal order would constitute a war crime. It isn't suggested.
▶ 2:40:36There's a specific example to show a clear-cut example of what this entails in our own manual. With that in mind, let's look back a few weeks ago when a fishing crew ended a long day of hard fishing, scoring a full stock of albaore and swordfish on board.
▶ 2:40:56Without any warning or expectation, this small Ecuadorian fishing vessel operating about 200 nautical miles off the Galapagos Islands was militarily engaged by US forces. It was hit once, then it was hit again. Not a warning shot, not an interdiction, two drone strikes. Survivors described chaos and severe injuries.
▶ 2:41:18Our US forces then handcuffed the crew at gunpoint, placed black hoods over their heads, seized and scrubbed their devices, and then held them for days. Ultimately, the crew was released given there was no evidence no evidence to support any narco activity or any charges that may be against them. So to recap, we struck a vessel, we struck it again, set fire to as it as it was sinking, and as public reports say, even drank their beer.
▶ 2:41:46We we detained the survivors and then we let them go. This should be eye opening. Now let's go to another example. The double tap or two strike attack that took place on September 2nd in the Caribbean. A vessel was struck, disabled, and then struck again, killing uh all but two survivors that were left clinging to the wreckage. And this is the thing. We know this happened. We know how it happened.
▶ 2:42:14And the Defense Department still refuses to release the follow-up video of the killing of the shipwrecked survivors, even though they released the initial one to the public in major news networks No difference in sources and methods in the two videos, but still not released to the public. Of course, the backlash was severe at the time, and perhaps it's being forgotten. an impictable uh but enoble display of character from this administration.
▶ 2:42:43Fingers were pointed at one another as everyone scured to cover anastic acknowledgement that this was an issue potentially violating international law. Now, I've reviewed what's been available. The phony rationale that this uh these attacks are about fentanyl trafficking when we know fentanyl comes from China, India through Mexico. Then the baseless argument that this was about narco You know, I don't believe a word of it.
▶ 2:43:12This was to create leverage for regime change in Venezuela. And now the president acknowledged that was about oil. Beyond the simple need for justice and exercising American values, it's important for us to discuss what the US beligerance in the world stage means to our security, our ability to marshall cooperation with our allies, and most importantly, not to normalize these actions that could endanger the lives of
▶ 2:43:42our own service members put in similar Let me be clear about one thing. Whether it's these particular strikes discussed here, the one that killed 11 others off the coast of Venezuela, whether it's the 178 other killings, with each of these extrajudicial killings, the administration is pirating American values. We'll continue to investigate this. We will.
▶ 2:44:11It'll come forward in the future. Some days those that second video will be released. But we've got to stop also using our precious resources uh that are being taxed so heavily all over the world on actions that hurt our military. They hurt our military and they hurt our standing internationally and they're hurting our standard here at I hope that we can move forward.
▶ 2:44:40I hope we can review whether these uh are justified because I found no We were given classified information on the second strike. I can't discuss it, but I must tell you, it's the most convoluted I ever heard in my life. This should be public. This is our honor. This is what it makes American a differencemaker. This is what we're
▶ 2:45:04incredible array of false accusations.
▶ 2:45:06And I yield back time.
▶ 2:45:08Gentleman yields back. Chair now recognizes a gentleman from Texas, Dr.
▶ 2:45:14Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Secretary Hegsth. and General Kaine and Mr. Hurst for your bold leadership and for your time today. I really appreciate it. I can't tell you how awesome this hearing is today. It's fantastic. After someone who from someone who sit up here for four years during the last administration, this is a great day. Despite some of the crazy and disrespectful comments from some in this room, the Department of War is back.
▶ 2:45:38Today is a win because we are discussing American power and dominance, national security, and making America great again. There may be differences in how we go about that, but at least we are not wasting all of our time talking about how to restructure the Department of War into a social experiment that appeases the far-left woke agenda that existed for the last four years. Thank God those four years of the disastrous Biden administration are done.
▶ 2:46:06On behalf of someone who served 25 years on active duty and almost everyone I know currently serving in uniform, thank you, Mr. Secretary for saving the department. Okay. My question. The US special operations command budget has been relatively flat flat over the past decade, failing to keep pace with inflation and reducing the command's purchasing power by 14%.
▶ 2:46:28I was disappointed to see that SOCOM's FY27 budget request was only $223 million higher than last year's enacted level, dropping even further from an already less than 2% to now just above 1% of the department's overall budget. All of this comes despite being increasingly asked to do more. From 2023 to 2025, there was a 35% increase in combatant command demand for soft capabilities.
▶ 2:46:55And last year alone, SOCOM was unable to satisfy roughly 70 mission specific requests due to resource and capacity restraints. Secretary Heget, I have appreciated the opportunity to meet with members of your team and leaders like ASW Solic Anderson and SOCOM commander Admiral Bradley as we work to grow the SOCOM topline for future fiscal years.
▶ 2:47:16Can you discuss the critical role soft plays in underpinning in underpinning deterrence and do you agree with the urgent need to grow the SOCOM budget accordingly?
▶ 2:47:27Well, Congressman, thank you for your words. Uh, and I wholeheartedly agree. When you look at the burden that SOCOM shoulders on behalf of the joint force, it's uh it's incredible and it's significant and so many of the things we have accomplished would not have been possible without the incredible leadership of of Admiral Bradley, General Braga, and others inside that community. and what what they do. I I I recognize your desire for increased funding beyond what is in FY27. We have and will continue to look at that. That needs to happen.
▶ 2:47:56I think some of the other other things inside the budget, drones, quality of life, there will be things that are applied to that community even more so we believe uh to ensure that they're taken care of properly. And then there's facility questions uh that are outstanding also which which we're examining. So we're committed and we want to work with you where where we've missed something. We need to get it right because they are at the front lines.
▶ 2:48:17Thank you. And that leads into my next question. I just want to ask this real quickly. Uh but uh this uh this year's budget request of 54.6 billion for the uh for the dog for the defense autonomous warfare group is a vital step to unleash American drone dominance and rapidly integrate autonomous and unmanned systems across the joint force. And we've talked about that a little bit here. However, my concern is only 1 billion of this proposed funding is included in in the base request with the remaining 53.6 6 billion dependent on future reconciliation package.
▶ 2:48:44While I understand the flexibility this approach provides, I remain concerned about the potential gaps created if such a package fails to occur or if funding for the dog is not included in future budget requests to and and and like you said, I'm hoping that SOCOM is a big part of this.
▶ 2:48:59But to avoid critical capability gaps, how's the department planning to fully fund dog at the 54 54.6 $6 billion if reconciliation stalls or if the department uh or or does the department intend to transition funds for autonomous requirements into the base budget for future years? And additionally, as you mentioned, how will the department ensure SOCOM receives and executes portions of this funding to meet future mission requirements?
▶ 2:49:25It's the right question and we plan to work handinand glove with this committee with OM with the White House to ensure that that reconciliation package is properly tailored and timed so that it is passed so that critical money gets there. So we're not looking to FY28 or FY29 because we need those capabilities right now. Which is why I appreciate the chairman's opening question about reconciliation. It is a critical vehicle in this calendar year to ensure this department is fully funded to meet the threats of the future.
▶ 2:49:52Well, thank you once again. and I think you guys are doing an incredible job. I appreciate your leadership and thank you for your time today. I yield back, Mr.
▶ 2:49:58Gentleman yields back. Chair, I recognize a gentle lady from Pennsylvania, Miss Hulahan.
▶ 2:50:03Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I appreciate you, gentlemen, uh, for being here today and for the opportunity to have a face-to-face conversation with each of you. I have many questions and unfortunately need to start with some that disturb me, Mr. Secretary, from your opening remarks. In your opening remarks, Mr. Secretary, you reserved more words and more time and more vitriol to condemn Democrats than you did for she and for Putin combined.
▶ 2:50:31It's pretty telling to me that you decided to use your words and your time for that. It turns out that Democrats, even Democrats in Congress, are patriots as well. We serve in our uniform services. We admire and love our uniform services. And we love our country just as much as Republicans do. In fact, in this body, I and Representative Bacon, who you just spoke to, led the junior enlisted payraises that you now sit there and lauded as your and take credit for.
▶ 2:51:02We led the closing of the BAH, which then you ended up poaching and using for other things. This body led and authorized Ukrainian funding that is now being withheld. You also in your opening remarks strangely admonished us here for not being patient with the results of your two-month war. A war of your suggestion to this president, a war of your choice. A war you executed without congressional consultation. And so it shouldn't be shock shocking, sir, Mr.
▶ 2:51:31Secretary, that we have questions. Indeed, it's constitutionally our right to do so. So to be clear, despite a brilliant performance by our men and women in uniform, despite thousands of tactical successes, Iran still has nuclear material, still has air defenses, still has small boats, and still has the strait. So despite the fact that your recent comments indicate that operations appear to be finished, it's clear there clearly is more work that needs to be done. As mentioned, today is indeed 60 days. So Mr.
▶ 2:52:01Secretary, how many more months, just order of magnitude, do you think that you're going to need to be able to conclude operations successfully? And how many more billions of dollars do you think you're going to ask this body for?
▶ 2:52:15Well, as you know, and as the president has stated, you would never tell your adversary, especially that is the line that you always give me decimated their military and you control their
▶ 2:52:26how long you would be committed to the mission. And the next thing that you mentioned in your opening remarks, Mr.
▶ 2:52:31is that you called on which which astounded me, examples of the Afghanistan war, the Iraq war, and the Vietnam war. Those are stunning examples to me of something that didn't go our way. We had the opportunity to execute on those wars quite well, but we didn't accomplish any mission in my opinion, and I think you would agree on that as
▶ 2:52:51My point is this effort is not those
▶ 2:52:54That's exactly it. Is this war shaping up to be that war? because it has
▶ 2:52:58we're shaping up to get the same kind of Democrats we got in those wars who were naysayers from the beginning undermining the progress of
▶ 2:53:04let's have a conversation about the country and the nation and not about
▶ 2:53:09this the Democrat party wanted to socially engineer the department we've had to undo that and get it to a point where it's not power that conversation so I will move and I'm going to reclaim my time
▶ 2:53:21General George let's talk about a guy who's a patriot somebody who every single person here in this dis and down there in that audience and out there in this world has huge admiration for why did he get fired?
▶ 2:53:36Well, as with uh any moves we make with general officers, first of all, I thank them for their service. Uh and
▶ 2:53:43my impression is you thanked him by a text or a phone call. You didn't even do it to his face.
▶ 2:53:49Out of respect for these officers, we never talk about the nature of their removal, but every one of them, including myself, knows that they serve at the pleasure of the president. out of respect to these officers, we don't reveal it. However, I will note it's very difficult to change the culture of a department that was been destroyed by the wrong perspectives. The same office destroyed a culture.
▶ 2:54:09There are many we've we've gotten rid of many general officers in this administration because we need new
▶ 2:54:15Sir, you have no way of explaining why you fired one of the most decorated and remarkable men who needed new
▶ 2:54:21And so, your answer is a very immature way of responding to my my request. My next question has to do with my remaining time about the fact that there apparently are orders that you've recently given to the Navy to detail officers to command billets in special operations where they the people who you're detailing have already received bad performance reviews. They've received negative fitness reports. Is there a truth to that statement, sir?
▶ 2:54:45I'm not aware of what you're referring
▶ 2:54:47Have you ever ordered a Navy the Navy to add officers who never screened for special operations major command to the promotion list for flag officer? I I'm not aware of what you're referring
▶ 2:54:57All right, I'll take that for a No, thank you. I yield.
▶ 2:55:01Generally yields back. Uh for everybody's situational awareness, it's my plan uh at 1:00 or approximately 1:00 to recess for about 10 minutes to give the witnesses a chance to stretch their legs and visit the restroom if necessary. Uh but with that, we will now go to the gentleman from Florida, Mr.
▶ 2:55:17Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And um Mr. Secretary, uh, are you aware that, uh, that Iran either through our intelligence or they themselves said they had about 500 kilograms of enriched uranium up to about 60%.
▶ 2:55:35We're aware of what they have or what they believe they have and what we know they have, but all of that is is
▶ 2:55:40Fair enough. And and if if indeed they had 500 kgs of of your enriched uranium, how many how how long would it take to take it to weapons grade
▶ 2:55:51quickly enough that it's a serious national security problem for the United
▶ 2:55:55If I said if I said days or a few weeks, would that be inaccurate?
▶ 2:56:00You might be somewhere in the ballpark.
▶ 2:56:01Okay, thank you. Actually, that's you can just get that from uh chat GDP. It'll it'll give it to you. Okay, so um so it's not that classified. All right. Um, would you say that that our primary mission in this war is to deny Iran the capability to develop a nuclear weapon?
▶ 2:56:20Yes. And do would you say that a regime that's capable of killing 35,000 of its own people within a two-day period, are they capable, if they had the delivery systems, to carry out their threat to destroy Israel and also to harm the United States of America? Any regime willing to kill 35,000, and we think it might be more, 45,000 of their own citizens in cold blood uh would most certainly be willing to use the most dangerous weapon in the world.
▶ 2:56:49Especially as history teaches us, when a nation says they will do something, you ought listen. And when they chant death to America or death to Israel, if they got that nuclear weapon, history tells us they might use it. Well, Hitler said he was going to kill the the Jewish he was going to try to eliminate the Jewish uh population and and Jews from the face of the world. Nobody really believes him, but he really tried to do that. So, when somebody tells me for 47 years that they want to kill us, I think I'm going to take him at the word.
▶ 2:57:17And so, would you also agree that that a a now another um goal of ours is to make sure that Iran never blockades the straight of Hormuz, never has control of the straight of Hormuz. Would that be a an objective of ours?
▶ 2:57:33What they're doing right now is effectively piracy. It's terrorism. It's threatening international shipping. Uh and our blockade is is signaling to the world that we actually control that straight. And I would ask uh this committee, what would this effort look like if Iran had nuclear weapons? Imagine if not Iran had nuclear capabilities, what they would do to wield over any advantage they have from proxies uh to funding international
▶ 2:57:57Mr. Mr. secretary. Also, not only would they do that, but imagine if we had not become energy independent.
▶ 2:58:04Under the previous administration, they were hampering our ability to be energy independent uh under the guise of of, you know, the Green New Deal, which is insanity, by the way. Uh I'm going to go back a little bit in history. Uh we were bombed uh Pearl Harbor was bombed on December 7th, 1941. Um, do you know how long it took for the United States to have its first major victory in World War II on in the Pacific theater?
▶ 2:58:31Number of years.
▶ 2:58:32No, it was actually six months. It was it was the Battle of Midway. All right. It was a turning point of World War II. Could you imagine if we had had the same Democrats uh asking the then Secretary of War, all right, gee, it's been two months, okay, and we haven't won this war yet. back then we didn't even have we didn't win a major battle for six months. Your job the job of the military what you've done in the first two months is extraordinary.
▶ 2:59:01And so again for my one f a couple of final questions. Do you know how much money we spent on helping Ukraine
▶ 2:59:09under the previous administration?
▶ 2:59:11No. Right now up to now
▶ 2:59:12up to upwards of 300 billion
▶ 2:59:14probably you're probably right about $300 billion. And yet I don't hear anything about, you know, gee, how much money have we spent on Ukraine from the other side. The difference between them and me is this. I support the United States and their efforts to help Ukraine against a dictatorial uh aggressive power like Russia, which is our second greatest adversary. But I also support our efforts to make sure that that Iran never has a nuclear weapon.
▶ 2:59:43And so you'll always have my support. And I'm pretty I'm pretty consistent in that. I also support our efforts in what we did in Venezuela. We still have to go a little bit further because that remnants of that regime are still there. Uh and we need to provide freedom for the people of Venezuela.
▶ 2:59:59And also one thing for me, I guess what what I'm looking for in this war with Iran is to make sure that Iran never has a nuclear weapon, that we have established an inspection uh uh protocol to make sure they never get a nuclear weapon and that we control the straight and they never can control the
▶ 3:00:17gentleman's time's expired. Chair served as your private attorney, Uh, correct.
▶ 3:00:33And Mr. Parli Parloratory also served as private attorney for President Trump's campaign. Correct.
▶ 3:00:40I'm not privy to every professional uh position that he's held.
▶ 3:00:44Well, I'll help you out. He did. And you appointed Mr. Parloratory as your senior adviser, correct?
▶ 3:00:52Uh, he does reserve duty on behalf of the Navy. Uh,
▶ 3:00:55his title is senior adviser. You gave him that title, correct?
▶ 3:00:58And I would uh count him as very much an adviser of mine.
▶ 3:01:01Yep. He travels with you.
▶ 3:01:04Uh Tim Parlorator has been a long-term friend. Uh he's a great patriot.
▶ 3:01:08He travels with you. That's not what I asked to reclaim my time. He travels with you, doesn't he? He travels with you, doesn't he?
▶ 3:01:15Correct. There's there's public Instagram that shows this. Just say yes.
▶ 3:01:18Yes, of course.
▶ 3:01:19Okay. He sits in meetings with you and advises you, doesn't he? Uh, he sits in some meetings on
▶ 3:01:27Well, he maintains a desk in an office in the Pentagon, does he not?
▶ 3:01:31I'd have to check.
▶ 3:01:33You don't know?
▶ 3:01:34It's a big Pentagon.
▶ 3:01:38You directly commissioned Mr. Parloratory in the Naval Reserve as a Navy commander in March 2025. Did you
▶ 3:01:44I was very proud to do so.
▶ 3:01:46And when you did, because he's a Navy reserve officer, he didn't have to go through the PO process. the White House Presidential Personnel Office, right? He wasn't vetted by White House PO.
▶ 3:01:57Unifor service members uh don't get vetted by
▶ 3:01:59The answer is yes. He didn't have to be vetted by White House PO. He didn't go through the Senate confirmation process either, did he?
▶ 3:02:07The answer is no.
▶ 3:02:09I don't know what you're getting to, but Tim is a fantastic
▶ 3:02:11I'll tell you what I'm getting to. The answer is no. Right.
▶ 3:02:13He does great work.
▶ 3:02:14Okay. Um, he didn't maintain a security clearance when uh you appointed him as special adviser. Is that right?
▶ 3:02:25I' I'd have to check.
▶ 3:02:26You don't know.
▶ 3:02:28I mean, anybody that is has access to sensitive material is going to have the appropriate clearance.
▶ 3:02:33Okay. So, when you appointed him as special adviser, he had a security
▶ 3:02:38I don't You're trying to piece together a time.
▶ 3:02:40No, I'm asking a simple question. One of your special most sensitive adviserss, did he have a security clearance? Oh, you're playing a gotcha game like you do on TV and everywhere else. You're trying to thread together details that are about something else.
▶ 3:02:51Clearly, you're concerned about my line of questioning, aren't you, Mr. Secretary? Because you know where it's going, don't you?
▶ 3:02:57I I think you do.
▶ 3:03:00So, does Mr. Parloratory represent foreign governments? He has a private law practice, does he not?
▶ 3:03:07From what I understand of his law practice, he does a lot of great work for service members in the military and
▶ 3:03:12He maintains a private law practice. Does he represent foreign governments or foreign persons in that private law
▶ 3:03:18Uh, I don't know.
▶ 3:03:19You don't know. Somebody who's sitting in in your meetings, a special adviser. You don't know.
▶ 3:03:24Uh, does he represent any senior officers who are currently under consideration for promotion by you or your office?
▶ 3:03:32The only person that makes determinations about senior officers is
▶ 3:03:37Answer the question. Does he represent senior officers who are under consideration for promotion by you? No, I'm I'm the one that makes decisions about choosing.
▶ 3:03:45Does he represent them, Mr. Secretary? Does he represent them?
▶ 3:03:48Does he represent anyone? He's a legal adviser and always has been.
▶ 3:03:51But he has clients, does he not?
▶ 3:03:52He's a legal adviser to me on reserve duty and he always has been and he does a fantastic job.
▶ 3:03:57Is it true that Mr. Parloratory was removed? I reclaimed my time. Is it true that Mr. Parloratory was removed from an investigation by the White House last
▶ 3:04:05Uh, I don't know what you're referring to, but uh, not that I'm aware of.
▶ 3:04:08You're not aware of it. Was it true that you were also removed from that same
▶ 3:04:14The answer is yes.
▶ 3:04:15Uh, no. Not that I'm aware of.
▶ 3:04:16You're not aware of it. That's
▶ 3:04:19Well, um, is it true that Mr. Parloratory disparaged President Trump?
▶ 3:04:26Uh, I don't know what you're referring to, but no.
▶ 3:04:28Is it true that Mr. Parliatory was accused by President Trump and his lawyers of lying?
▶ 3:04:36What you're accused of is a cute line of questioning that's going nowhere. Well, it's going somewhere, which is why you're not answering the question. Was it true that he was accused of lying by the president's legal team?
▶ 3:04:49I'm not uh familiar to You'd have to give me the
▶ 3:04:52Well, it's right here. You want to look at the statement from President
▶ 3:04:55Blow up a quote and claim it says something and that's what you're doing in a little stunt.
▶ 3:04:58Secretary Hegth, what I'm really concerned about is you purport to be have unfaltering loyalty to President Trump and yet you are continuously
▶ 3:05:06You care a lot about President Trump, don't you? You were going behind waste of your 5 minutes. I reclaimed my waste of your 5 minutes that
▶ 3:05:13I reclaimed my time. You are repeatedly going from Colorado's time. Go ahead, Mr. Car.
▶ 3:05:20You are repeatedly going behind President Trump's back, appointing people who he have has accused of a lying who the White House is gentle time expired. And you are not being honest with gentle lady from South Carolina, Miss Mace.
▶ 3:05:32Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I request unanimous consent to enter a number of documents into the The first of which is a statement from
▶ 3:05:42The first of which is a statement from Corey Mills first sergeant stating his forms and accounts of his military service are falsified. The second document is a picture of Corey Mills wearing a Bronze Star from 2019 before he ever got a Bronze Star. The third document is a document that conveys uh a Bronze Star medal and uh his lifesaving care to the wounded. And according to the soldiers who were there, it said it, they said it never happened, according to the men who were there.
▶ 3:06:08The next document is a transcript of a conversation I had with Brigadier General Arnold Gordon Bray, who confirmed that he did not review, did not read, did not physically sign the form, uh, DD, I guess 638, form 638 that Mills submitted for a Bronze Star.
▶ 3:06:26And to be candid, he said, quote, "I didn't look at it." Um, I asked to review the email that he sent to bra to uh Mills staff about authorizing his signature for a form he did not review and he said that he would not share it with me. Um, that's a future subpoena. I would like to enter to record a picture of Corey Mills who says this is the second time he got blown up. But what he wouldn't tell people that the blood on the pant leg in this photo is the blood of Sergeant Ray. It is not Corey Mills blood.
▶ 3:06:53In the same series of photos he shares when he said he was quote blown up are images of a Humvey that exploded with uh severe damage that is not his Humvey. His Humvey purportedly was 50 yards away and suffered no damage and was not blown up. This is a copy of Cory Mills marriage certificate with a 911 imam at a 911 mosque for the record and redacted with family members names redacted and protected.
▶ 3:07:18This is a picture of Corey Mills with a purported Russian hooker in Afghanistan, which he of course denies. And then last but not least, I would like to request unanimous consent to enter into the record a restraining order against Corey Mills for dating violence. Thank you. I just buried my father on Thursday, Mr. Chairman. My father died with shrapnel in his body. He had three tours of combat.
▶ 3:07:45Two in Vietnam, one in 1965 during the coup d'eta, the Dominican Republic. And I take stolen valor seriously because we have men and women in uniform that have given their lives. And and an individual that steals the stories of dead soldiers or injured soldiers have no right to serve in this body, let alone on this committee. Um, and so I take it very seriously. I want to thank you, Mr. secretary and the folks that serve under you in the Department of War.
▶ 3:08:15As my father lay dying on April 14th, there was only one thing that calmed him down that gave him the courage to pass on to the next life. And that was for me to read stories and testimony from three different soldiers that we didn't have, our family previously didn't have. We've been doing a lot of research on my father's service when he when he received the Distinguished Service Cross with Vice in 1968 in Dongzai. He rescued every man in that battle in that firefight uh over a two-day period.
▶ 3:08:45Uh he rescued them dead or alive on his own. He stood up to take fire over and over and over again. He called on artillery, heavy artillery onto his position within a 100 meters of his position. The man should have never made it out of Vietnam alive. And in fact, his commanding officers kept him back in many cases because they thought he was on a suicide mission because he was just so dangerous out there. But he saved the lives of so many soldiers.
▶ 3:09:11And so as he was taking his final breaths, I was provided by the Department of the Army some testimony of soldiers we didn't have and diagrams and information. It was the one thing that calmed him down so he could pass away knowing that he was a war hero and knowing that Jesus loved him. And um uh it it changed our family's life and it changed his life in his last moments, his last breaths, his last hours.
▶ 3:09:38And for that, I am so grateful for the ship that you're running at the Pentagon and the Department of War. I have heard from people and the way that you're trying to innovate and trying to change the way do we do business there. And I'm glad that you're firing people. There are people there that are getting in your way. They need to go.
▶ 3:09:54and the efficiencies that you want to bring whether it's ship building whether it's cyber whether it's AI whether it's public private partnerships we have never seen a secretary at the department of war who has been as innovative as you have so I can't say enough good things about you right now uh I was impressed I was concerned about troops on the ground in Iran early on and I was impressed with uh where we are today how those soldiers were evacuated that were that gotten that uh flight that crashed but everything I have seen You
▶ 3:10:24have surpassed all of my expectations and I just want to say thank you from the bottom of my heart and God bless you.
▶ 3:10:32Gentle lady yields back. Chair now recognize gentleman from Maine, Mr.
▶ 3:10:36Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning, Mr. Secretary and General Kaine. I'd like to use my time to drill down on an important decision concerning America's surface fleet. That is the future of the DDG-51 Flight 3 destroyer. Everyone on this committee knows about the Navy's struggles to successfully design, manage, and field new classes of ships. To name a few examples, I'll highlight the latoral combat ship, the Zumalt class destroyer in the recently canceled constellation class frigate.
▶ 3:11:04By any measure, the Arley Burke class destroyer has been a highly successful program that continues to deliver the Navy a large surface compat combatant it can depend on. So, the Zomalt class destroyers were going to replace the Arley Burke. It's a ship with some interesting capabilities, but the Navy rushed to construction before the design was complete and it lacked a workable weapon system that the Navy wanted to outfit it with. So, the Navy scrapped the program at three ships and went back to the DDG. I'm in my eighth year on this committee.
▶ 3:11:32In the entire time I've been in conversation with the Navy publicly and privately about the latest Flight 3 destroyer and how critical a role it will play, it would play and now is playing for the surface fleet. And yet, even before we delivered one to the fleet, the Navy was already planning the I'm skeptical about the transition to yet another new class of surface ship given the troubles I've laid out already.
▶ 3:11:56From my perspective, we have a proven hall for an Arley Burke destroyer that is described by CNO after CNO again and again and again as the backbone of the Navy's surface fleet. But now I'm even more skeptical. The proposal cuts production of of the destroyer down to just one ship, scraps the future destroyer, and proposes 17 billion billion to build just a single new battleship, a class of ship the Navy decommissioned in 1992. Mr.
▶ 3:12:24Secretary, when you visited Bath Iron Works, you discussed this budget proposal with ship builders. You said, quote, "We're maxing out on DDGs. It's a workhorse, and it's a damn good workhorse." You were right about the DDGS. They are a workhorse. They're costefficient, deadly effective, and feared by our enemies. And I'm wondering why would we move on so quickly from a relatively new Flight 3 destroyer that's the gold standard for ballistic missile and drone defense capabilities.
▶ 3:12:51It's a ship that's proven itself time and again recently in the Mediterranean, Persian Gulf, in the Taiwan Strait. I understand the Navy wants to field hypersonic missiles, but look no further than the three Zumwalt ships that the Navy has in the fleet that have been refitted with vertical launch tubes capable of delivering hypersonic missiles at a pay at a great payload at over 17,000 miles this year.
▶ 3:13:16Perhaps what's most troubling to me is that the battleship plan proposes moving at a pace that is, I think, extremely dangerous or just high risk, low reward. To begin construction so quickly, breezing right through design. It's well documented that expediting design and preemptively moving to construction is the greatest recipe for failure.
▶ 3:13:42This represents an unacceptable cost to taxpayers if it fails and leaves America less secure and our navy navy less prepared. I understand the proposed battleship was a bit of a dream child of the recently departed Secretary of the Navy. I want to remind everyone here that recent history is littered with failed efforts to replace existing successful programs that remain the best-in-class worldwide. This isn't the failure of ship builders or sailors.
▶ 3:14:12It's a failure by leaders to learn a simple lesson. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. My sincere hope is that you, the Navy, and the Congress will pump the brakes on this battleship. Take the time to get it right, whatever it is. And for now, focus on the workhorse you can depend on. America cannot afford a surface fleet without a backbone. I very much appreciate that perspective.
▶ 3:14:35And uh the idea of divesting of an a a asset that's uh indispensable right now is not just a Navy problem. I mean we've seen the same on MQ9s and Apaches and A-10s and systems that we war fighters continue to rely on.
▶ 3:14:49Which is why divesting to invest, which was sold under the previous administration because of continuing resolutions and insufficient budgets, created a gap where now you're getting rid of the very things that you need right now and you don't have available the things of the future that you said you would have because of the way this department did business. Always overcost, always delayed.
▶ 3:15:09So there's one destroyer, one Arley Burke class destroyer in this budget because, and I hate to even say it, I'm not going to say it in open hearing, how many years behind we are on the backlog of building the Arley Burke class destroyers. So the bulk of the money goes into ship building to fix that, ensure we can get new places to build more faster. Then you can fund additional uh e whether it's this class or the next class. But the
▶ 3:15:31we're almost over time. I'm going to reclaim and just say in my last seconds here, careful with the pace moving through design to construction so quickly as proposed by this budget. Thank you.
▶ 3:15:41General's times expired. As announced earlier, we're going to now recess until 10 minutes past the hour of 1.
▶ 3:31:04We will call this hearing back to order. And we now recognize the gentleman from Texas, Mr. Latrell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, thank you for your service and your cons continued service to this great country. Uh, Mr.
▶ 3:31:21Secretary, a few weeks ago, um, our commander-in-chief, the president signed an executive order over research on psychedelic medications hovering over the veteran space as well as active members. Could you uh and I know you're aware of this and the health and well-being of my of the service members and the veterans is very near and dear to my heart. We lose over 6,000 veterans a day. Oh, we uh a day a year.
▶ 3:31:52I would love to see that trajectory go to zero. Can you at a high level is the Department of War interested in kind of coming in with VA, HHS, NIH and pushing this type of research? First of all, thank you, Congressman, for all the work you've done on this. You are there's no more passionate advocate for him.
▶ 3:32:15And it was great to see you in the Oval Office uh with your brother and with uh so many other SEALs who are saying, "Hey, this this option saved my life or or gave me a new lease on life." And I've heard that time and time again based on that particular approach that the president has approved through the EO. And I think our department has shown a willingness to be flexible and look at new options and new alternatives.
▶ 3:32:39And I think if you talk to Secretary Collins at the VA, uh the partnership we've had is as deep as any partnership between the Department of War and uh the VA has ever existed. So we've got regular meetings between us as secretaries, but also our chiefs and then down into the committees to ensure the flow is consistent. But if there's something that the VA is doing that we should be looking at that enables our service members to be better at their job, we're going to entertain it. So I I I w thank you for your advocacy on it and we'll take a look at it. Thank you very much.
▶ 3:33:08And I I'm it excites me that that that the the two entities, one couldn't exist without the other, our I've had the opportunity to not not only travel the country but travel the world and visit the troo visit our troops uh either Okonis or Konis and I have to say sir the the morale the well-being just the sheer excitement our service members see or and how they're acting today uh it kind of takes me back to to our generation if you will just to see that
▶ 3:33:39kind of that forward momentum that intestinal fortitude kind of glows on them u and I think that's a direct correlation to your leadership sir as well as the president. Can you from your perspective, I'm assuming you're seeing the same thing.
▶ 3:33:51Um, and I I think that that that blue line that needed to be popped got popped and our service members are are absolutely leading from the front and there's and the world has noticed. Tell me I'm not seeing that just from my own eyes. Um, no you're not, Congressman. And I I meant this when I said it.
▶ 3:34:18I would encourage every single member of this committee to talk to lieutenants and captains and majors and colonels and sergeants and staff sergeants and sergeants major and specialists who are doing the job right now on the front lines or across the country. And they have seen a sea change in the environment and the morale and the spirit in their formations. And it isn't some secret sauce. It's don't treat us as a petri dish in your social justice exercise or your or your social engineering uh approach. Just let us do our job.
▶ 3:34:48Let us get back to basics. Let us train. Let us uh choose people and elevate people simply on merit and merit. That's motivating for people. That's why they join. That's why they do really difficult things like you did uh and are away from their families for a very long time. They want to defend their kids and grandkids, but they don't want to have distractions and debris on the inside.
▶ 3:35:10So, when we talk to them, they they are so grateful for the fact that we're just getting back to the basics of readiness, training, accountability, discipline, war fighting, uh commanders, squad leaders, you name it. And and to those watching across the country, ask folks who have served, who've been in it, how they view it, uh and they see it under President Trump's leadership fundamentally different. And we don't we haven't even talked about the border which is now secure.
▶ 3:35:36I mean there's the recruiting successes, the fitness and combat standards that have been restored. We're treating everybody at the same level. Sounds like basics, but it all translates into morale. And then morale translates into readiness. And that translates into capabilities. And then when you have a commander-in-chief that unleashes them, it turns into mission success. And then the world pays attention to what the American military is capable of doing. And it's on the shoulders of of leaders like you who've did it in previous generations. We're simply doing it again. So, thank you for your leadership.
▶ 3:36:03Thank you, Mr. Secretary. And and for everyone in the room that's in uniform, God bless each and every one of you for your service as well as your families. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, sorry about that.
▶ 3:36:14I thought you liked me.
▶ 3:36:15I did. I'm sorry that slip.
▶ 3:36:17Gentlemen, we now go to the gentle lady from California, Miss Jacobs.
▶ 3:36:21Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary, as you know, I represent San Diego, the largest military community in the country. Right now, as we are speaking, 2500 San Diego Marines are off the coast of Iran. Many, many other San Dieans in uniform have gotten 48 hour deployment notices. So, this war in Iran is not theoretical for me or for my constituents. It's it's deeply personal.
▶ 3:36:46Uh, as you also know, on Easter Sunday, President Trump threatened to destroy Iran's bridges and power plants, writing, quote, "Open the straight, you crazy bastards, or you'll be living in hell. Just watch." And two days later, President Trump wrote, quote, "A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again. I don't want that to happen, but it probably will." My office's phones have been ringing off the hook.
▶ 3:37:12I've heard from so many military families concerned about the president's mental fitness and whether he's fit to serve as our commander-in-chief given that he's sending their loved ones into harm's way. Our troops who have shown incredible bravery and tactical proficiency deserve to know that their leaders are focused and stable. So, Mr. Secretary, you are with the president a lot. And it pains me to even have to ask this about our president, but my constituents lives are at stake.
▶ 3:37:41Do you believe that the president is mentally stable enough to be the
▶ 3:37:46Um, did you ask the same question of Joe Biden for four years?
▶ 3:37:49Mr. Secretary, Joe Biden is not the president. Mr. Trump has been president for a year and a half, and I'm asking you, and I won't even engage with the level of disparagement that you're putting on the commander-in-chief, who indeed uh is I I mean, every I mean, Mr. Secretary, every single day,
▶ 3:38:04Mr. Secretary, Biden is not the
▶ 3:38:06most insightful commander-in-chief we've had in generations. And you want to compare I mean you want to ask that question after you and your fellow Democrats defended Joe Biden who could barely speak and didn't know what day of the week it was. He governed through an auto pen. You had a secretary of defense who went awall for a week. I can't be on for 10 day for 10 minutes.
▶ 3:38:24I will reclaim my time lady's time. She reclaimed it astonishing.
▶ 3:38:28So as Mr. Jimenez said we should be taking leaders at their word. So is there a reason that we should not be taking our leader at his word? Iran should not underestimate the will of President Trump and the United States military to uh achieve our mission.
▶ 3:38:43Okay. Well, I I want you to know this is not a partisan thing. In fact, many many Democrats have had and many many Republicans have had these same questions. Marjorie Taylor Green said he's out of control and he's gone insane. Candace Owens said the se 25th amendment needs to be invoked. Megan Kelly, Tucker Carlson, who you used to work with, Alex Jones, Stephanie Gisham, the lifts could go on. So, how do I explain to my constituents that while they are in harm's way, their commander-in-chief is posting these unhinged posts?
▶ 3:39:14How did you explain to your constituents what happened on October or what happened in Afghanistan or what happened with the debacle and the withdrawal in Afghanistan where the troops were left? How did you explain that Joe Biden's leadership? Mr. Secretary, how did you explain that to the Marines that didn't get medals that we restored their medals because of that disastrous in Afghanistan? Did you explain that to your constituents when Joe Biden was asleep at the wheel and he had an AOL?
▶ 3:39:35Okay, Mr. Secretary, how can I next
▶ 3:39:38How can I explain this next post to my
▶ 3:39:45I'm Jewish, so um this doesn't really bother me, but my understanding is that this is quite uh offensive to many Christians. So, how how do you explain this post?
▶ 3:39:54I'm not here to explain post. We have an incredible commander-in-chief who puts our troops first. I'm here for a budget hearing about our troops.
▶ 3:40:02This is a historic budget that's giving it a chance to defend Mr. Secretary our adversaries and President Trump is doing that in world class fashion.
▶ 3:40:10Young lady has reclaimed her time. Mr.
▶ 3:40:12this is about our troops. This is about who is commanding our troops and if our troops can trust that they are being sent into harm's way under good strategy. The mental stability of our commander-in-chief is deeply important to our troops. It's deeply important to this country. It is it wasn't important to you during mistake. I'll remind you that when there were concerns, Democrats came together and he was not our nominee for president. So I encourage you to do have the same courage that Democrats had. Mr.
▶ 3:40:40Secretary, you keep saying that he is the best commander-in-chief we've ever had, the best
▶ 3:40:45to the troops.
▶ 3:40:4613 American troops have died. More than 380 have been wounded. The street of Hormuz, which was wide open, is now closed. Less than 90% of traffic through the strait is still not going despite the ceasefire. The Iranian regime is still in power. It still has nuclear material. The war is costing Americans billions of dollars. And Mr. Secretary, if you think that this is what winning looks like, then maybe we should be questioning your mental stability.
▶ 3:41:13Maybe you are the one responsible for this failure and the president should think about replacing you. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
▶ 3:41:19Lady for the wrong lady from Virginia, Miss Kiggins. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to our witnesses for being with us. I have the privilege of representing Virginia's second congressional district, so Hampton Roads, home to a lot of our East Coast Navy. And I had the privilege of attending the VFA 106 change of command on Friday, which is our fleet replacement squadron for the F8 for the aging F-18s. Uh, but what an awesome event.
▶ 3:41:44and to talk to some of the Navy leadership that was there and to listen to them say firsthand uh just about the the morale of the squadrons that are currently deployed on the USS Ford specifically talking to leadership a lot of our children serve it's a family business for those of us in naval aviation and listen they're like don't believe the media the morale is amazing those guys are doing tip of the spear mission work I live with a retired F-18 pilot husband who also is begging to find a way to get back in the cockpit because he's jealous of what he sees so so just that type of
▶ 3:42:14mentality. Thank you for that. I know that they're they're doing a mission and keeping them engaged is an important part of the fight. Along those same lines about naval aviation, I would love to hear, Mr. Secretary, your thoughts about the future of naval aviation. I know that uh this is a budget hearing. So last year's budget, we had $900 million that we were looking forward to uh using the FAXX program and then the fiscal year 27 request was reduced 140 million and I of course keeping tabs on the Air Force.
▶ 3:42:42You know the five billion dollars for their F47 program. So we love aircraft carriers. We love that mobile air superiority piece. What are your plans for the future of naval aviation? I kick and scream every day of the week here in this committee about the F-35s and getting them at our East Coast Master Jet Base. I know the FAXX is our next generation strike fighter, but just would love to hear your plans and timelines for the future of naval
▶ 3:43:04Well, I appreciate your your comments and then I would defer to the chairman too on it uh on the utility remaining utility of the F-18s which are are still flying critical missions right now off our carriers and do a fantastic job. Uh
▶ 3:43:1830 plus years old, but yes.
▶ 3:43:19Yes. Correct. Uh which is why the issue of the FAXX is important. It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when. It's a matter of trade-offs in industry and design and capabilities, ensuring we're not slowing other things down at the behest of others. So, I think in August, the August time frame is I I'm sure you're familiar with that is what we're looking at. It's a critical capability that we we need to fund for the future of naval aviation. I would defer if anything you want to add.
▶ 3:43:43Sure. I I think you covered it. the you know we don't need a access basing and overflight off of a CSG and a CVN and so it gives the secretary and the president a lot of options. So um and I I just want to echo the thanks for the joint force on behalf of the joint force for all three CSGs that are out there getting after it right now. I I share uh your husband's jealousy um uh but uh just want the force to know how much we appreciate man especially the Ford.
▶ 3:44:14Thank you. Thanks very much, General. Then uh Mr. Secretary, uh just again representing a big Navy district and and uh having just a uh concern for the Navy, uh could you shed any light on why the Secretary of the Navy was relieved and what that timeline to replace replace him looks like for permanent leadership?
▶ 3:44:32I think that's one of the reasons why we struggle with uh with even I think about the basing decisions and again naval aviation and that's I wish we would talk more about about uh just the contributions of our aviators but could you shed any light on that issue? Well, as the president stated, we thank the previous secretary for his service. I appreciate a lot of the initiatives that he undertook. Ultimately, it was time for a new new leadership and a new direction as far as running fast toward those objectives. And so, we we made a change.
▶ 3:45:00We think uh it's hard to personnel is policy and the sooner you identify especially we talked about general officers uh you know, as you're evaluating whether they're running with uh the mission they've been given, you got to make a change if they're not. Same with civilians. And in this case, we made that change. and any timeline to replace or you have a new secretary of the Navy?
▶ 3:45:19Right. Right now we have an acting uh in Hunga who's uh was did a fantastic job as the number two and he'll be acting for now and um I would imagine we'll uh we'll know in due time.
▶ 3:45:29Thank you. Thank you. And then General Kaine, I know you're a VMI graduate and uh I know there's you're watching some of the partisan attacks that have been going on with some of our senior militarymies specifically in Virginia and I was wondering if you had any thoughts or have had any discussions about how we can remove some of our senior militarymies from these partisan state politics. I I I think it requires a further discussion. We had 170 Army ROC officers that we commissioned out of that school specifically, but we've seen pushes to shut down, defund, replace their board of visitors.
▶ 3:45:59any thoughts on how we can be more protective of those those great schools?
▶ 3:46:02Well, ma'am, you you sort of started where I'm going to land on the importance of staying politics as the chairman and not unintentionally or inadvertently stepping into a political matter where I should not. As the secretary said, people are policy and policies are things that we don't we don't do in the joint force. I appreciate all of the commissioning sources that are out there. Gentle lady's time expired. Chair, I recognize gentle lady from Washington, Miss
▶ 3:46:30Thank you, Chairman Rogers and member Smith. And thank you to the witnesses for being here today. This committee is being asked to consider a $ 1.5 trillion DoD budget request that funds not only weapons and system programs, but the people, leadership, readiness, and trust required to make them effective. When senior leaders are removed abruptly or merit-based promotions are disrupted without clear explanation, Congress does have the responsibility to understand the rationale and operational consequences. So, I'm going to focus on Secretary Hegsth.
▶ 3:47:00And to start, no one is disputing that senior officers serve at the pleasure of civilian leadership. The issue in front of this is whether the decision to remove General Randy George strengthened the Army or created an avoidable disruption during an active operational period.
▶ 3:47:16General George, who also served as commanding general at First Corps at JBLM, has been serving for four decades, including multiple command and operational leadership roles, culminating as chief of staff of the Army, responsible for readiness, force modernization, and the welfare of over a million soldiers and civilians. He was removed in the middle of an active conflict involving US operations against Iran when leadership continuity is most critical.
▶ 3:47:43Look, reporting indicates that General George's removal may have followed disagreements over Army personnel matters, including concerns regarding withheld promotions. So, my question, Secretary, is this. What specific national security risk, mission risk, or leadership concern did General George present that justified removing him in the middle of a conflict? Or was he removed because he challenged some decisions being made?
▶ 3:48:09Um, as I stated earlier, out of respect to these officers, I don't discuss the nature of the removal, but I would I would ask an earnest question of you, where does General George fall in the operational chain of command?
▶ 3:48:20So, I'm asking you, why did you fire him? Don't change.
▶ 3:48:23You talked about you talked about operational moment. Where does General George fall in? No, it's a simple question. You're on the House Armed Services Committee.
▶ 3:48:31Leadership concern. What did he present that justified removing him in the middle of a conflict? Do you know where General George serves on the operational chain of command?
▶ 3:48:39So my you ask you my question one more time, sir. Don't try to flip it on me. Why was he removed? Was he a national security risk, mission risk, or leadership concern?
▶ 3:48:48We don't.
▶ 3:48:48Yes or no?
▶ 3:48:49We don't talk about the nature of removal. You also won't answer where he is in the operational chain of command because he isn't in it.
▶ 3:48:56He isn't in the operational chain.
▶ 3:48:58Lady reclaimed her time.
▶ 3:49:00You want to tie it to the war, but you don't even know where he is in the chain of command. It's the gentle lady from Washington's time.
▶ 3:49:06Under Dodie 1320.04, 04. The Secretary of Defense may withhold or disprove forwarding nomination after service recommendations in limited circumstances, including newly identified adverse information, pending investigations, reportable information, and questions regarding mental, physical, moral, or professional qualification, incomplete or non-compliant nomination packages, missing certifications, or the need for additional clarification from the military department.
▶ 3:49:35Several colonels reportedly selected for Brigadier General were removed or withheld after board selection and service certification. Which of these specific grounds applied to each withheld officer and what objective evidence supported these decisions?
▶ 3:49:50Congressman, that was just one of many boards across the services where we will perform similar reviews and I anticipate other officers will be removed also.
▶ 3:49:58Okay. But what were the grounds for those? Again, we don't talk about out of respect for those officers, we don't talk about the nature of that. And we all serve at the pleasure of the president. We're solving for an institution that needs to be based on merit and professional uh execution. And there's been a lot of gender and demographic engineering that's been going on for reasons other than the focus of exactly what we should be doing on the battlefield. So whether it's that or I did not raise gender, you that's implied in every statement that everybody makes.
▶ 3:50:25And so ultimately as we review all these boards, it has nothing to do with anything other than their performance on the battlefield or their performance in their career.
▶ 3:50:33And these people are thoroughly vetted,
▶ 3:50:36thoroughly researched. And I guess my question is, is this about loyalty to Trump or is it about what's good for the
▶ 3:50:45Um, I understand what you're implying, but it's about the Constitution and our military and its ability to execute. And I'm going to make sure the president has the finest officers across the force prepared to deliver. So this committee funds weapons readiness, recruiting, professional development, and leadership pipelines. But no amount of money can compensate for a force that may lose trust in the fairness of advancement. And this is fairness. We believe in merit. We have always had a merit-based system. That's not the argument.
▶ 3:51:12No, we have not. Not under the B administration. We did not. It became social engineering, not merit. And we're fixing it quick.
▶ 3:51:17No, it did not. It did not. And when we consider this budget request, we must ensure that taxpayer dollars are matched by sound judgment, credible leadership, and a personnel system worthy of those who serve. I yield back, Mr. Chair.
▶ 3:51:30Gentle lady yields back. Chair not recogniz gentleman from Georgia, Mr.
▶ 3:51:35Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Gentlemen, thank you for being here today. I'm sorry I was late. I was on the floor of the House of Representatives with a FISA rule vote. Um, and I did not hear the majority of the testimony, but uh, Secretary Hith, I I respect you. I I do want you to know I disagree with the firing of General George. Um, I've sent you a letter. I hope you'll uh I look forward to seeing the responses on that.
▶ 3:52:03Um, and I I just I mean it it takes 218 votes to get something across the floor of the House of Representatives and and with NDAA and with budget plusups and everything else, um, we're going to lose some dimm votes. I mean, we're going to have to have I mean, we're going to lose some Republican votes. I mean, we're going to have to have some demotes to do the things that we have to do to fund the Department of Defense.
▶ 3:52:28Uh, and I just uh I would I would encourage everybody to keep that in in mind because we're going to we're going to lose some Republican votes on on the on the plus up. Uh General Kaine um the joint staff uh plays a unique role in our strategic direction.
▶ 3:52:54Uh the integration of services uh is what is what gives us a coherent joint force. I have I have seen where disputes in the air force and the army led to elimination of systems that we needed. uh as department has made attempts to rightsize various could you talk about the importance of the of the joint staff and the and the value to the joint force?
▶ 3:53:24Uh you you bet, sir. And and I'm uh I'm incredibly proud of the joint staff. you know our our job um is to integrate options to deliver those options to our national command authority work with all the services and the one area of exclusivity we have uh pursuant to the 2017 NDAA is as a global integrator and our J2 J3 J5 J7 team J8 all do a fantastic job along with the one
▶ 3:53:54and the six every day to and the four to to really bring the totality quality of American combat capability together into a range of options and risks that we can then bring to the secretary and the president. So they are uh extraordinary in everything they do and I I appreciate the chance to brag on them a little bit.
▶ 3:54:13Well, I I have watched as the Air Force was paying for a system that was predominantly used by the Army uh in the past. I'm talking about J Star specifically. It was ground moving target indicator that the army used, but it was coming out of the Air Force budget. And then um I think that dispute led to the standown of a system before another system was ready to go. Um and that's and that's a dangerous that's a dangerous thing.
▶ 3:54:39Um I spent a fair amount of time in Africa um from this committee's work and from uh HIPS's work. Uh we lost Airbase 101 and 2011. Uh all of you at that table know what happened there. Uh I blame that on state department and the way the state department handled that.
▶ 3:55:00Um how do you intend to handle one is are we looking at Niger and the potential to get 101 and 2011 back and um I do believe that that an apology would go a long way with that country as someone who's met with the ministers over there. Uh and interestingly enough, Minister Tumba wanted tractors. Uh he wanted John Deere tractors is what he asked for.
▶ 3:55:23Um, but where will we base out out of if we can't get Niger back and are we looking at getting 101 and 2011 back?
▶ 3:55:33Yes, sir. Uh, well, we we all want tractors. Um, so I I echo his thoughts there. You know, I know General Anderson is doing a lot of work right now, leaning forward, doing fantastic job along with his deputy commander, General Brennan, on looking at the the total requirements across the western flank uh for access, spacing, and overflight. 101 and 2011 are one of many things that they're considering.
▶ 3:55:59I think the key is uh what are they going to be able to do with the resources that they have? We're always in a resource constrained environment, Congressman, uh to put sufficient pressure on the CT adversaries there in order to hold them at bay.
▶ 3:56:14Well, the miltomill relationships are still good.
▶ 3:56:17Yes, sir.
▶ 3:56:17Um I've been out with some of the ODA teams over there as a civilian as as a member of Congress.
▶ 3:56:24It it does bother me that our footprint has gotten so much smaller over there, but I do know with drones and other things, it makes it much more difficult to have those outposts. But I appreciate all of you being here. Sorry that I have not been here.
▶ 3:56:34No, sir. appreciate the other work. Gentleman yields back. Chair and I recognize gentleman from New York, Mr.
▶ 3:56:40Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Head wounds, heavy bleeding, and then just shrapnel all over. So, folks are bleeding from their abdomen, bleeding from arms, bleeding from legs. Secretary Hegth, do you know who said that?
▶ 3:56:58Um, I'm not sure I do. It was one of our soldiers describing the devastating Iranian drone strike at Port Schuea March 1st in Kuwait. As you know, six of our soldiers killed, over 30 wounded.
▶ 3:57:12Secretary, do you know the range of the Shahed 136 one-way attack drone?
▶ 3:57:18it depends on the variant, but it's got serious distance.
▶ 3:57:21Several hundred miles.
▶ 3:57:22Do you know how far Porta is from Iran? Um there's a reason why we took extreme measures protection because we understood the proximity challenges.
▶ 3:57:32Mr. Chair, I'm going to reclaim my time. It's well under 100 miles. Before the war started,
▶ 3:57:38there was clear intelligence that Schuea was high on Iran's target list. Internal analysis that said the site was indefensible from aerial attack and should not be used. Yet you sent our soldiers from the 103rd Sustainment Command there anyway. Is that true or false? True or false? Straightforward
▶ 3:57:58Are you going to give me a chance to answer or just play? Gotcha.
▶ 3:58:01Did you send them there or not?
▶ 3:58:03I always We have We took proactive measures from the beginning to ensure protection and defensive posture was maximized across the theater.
▶ 3:58:11Let's talk about what defenses they had.
▶ 3:58:14Prior to the attack, officers on the ground knew our troops were vulnerable. In fact, they requested additional force protection. Did they receive it? Wherever humanly possible, force protection counter UAS was always made
▶ 3:58:28They did not. In fact, when asked to describe the base's defense, one survivor who's come forward from the unit said, quote, I mean, I would put it in the none category from a drone defense capability. None. So, let's be clear. No counter drone capabilities, no counter rocket systems, no counter mortar or counter artillery, not even the basic overhead protection that you and I had 20 years ago in Iraq.
▶ 3:58:58And now six of our soldiers are dead. The next day, you downplayed the attack. You said it was a squirter that squeaked through fortified defenses. But since then, thankfully, brave survivors have come forward to set the record straight.
▶ 3:59:20One of our surviving soldiers s told CBS, quote, "Painting a picture that one squeak through is a falsehood." Another said the unit was quote unprepared to provide any defense for itself. It was not a fortified position. Another survivor said the building's protection was about as weak as one gets.
▶ 3:59:48Secretary Hexath, that is obviously in direct contradiction to what you said from the Pentagon podium the next day. So, are you saying that these soldiers, our soldiers who survived this horrific attack are lying?
▶ 4:00:04What I'm saying is before the commencement of of the conflict, we put in maximum defensive posture we could. It's a direct cont in this directing. Can I speak or are you just going to monologue falsehoods all all over the place?
▶ 4:00:17It's not a falsehood.
▶ 4:00:18We moved 7500 troops off. Based on the
▶ 4:00:22based on the intel
▶ 4:00:23stop reclaiming my time.
▶ 4:00:24Because you yell doesn't make you right.
▶ 4:00:27Just because you yell doesn't make you
▶ 4:00:28Reclaiming my time on behalf of these survivors. You just said what they said is a falsehood.
▶ 4:00:34There's a much larger picture. There's a much larger picture at play here that included integrated air defenses, bunkers, moving people off the Mr. Secretary to ensure that they were not part of the target. We moved those troops and all across the theater, thousands of troops off the X, off of their bases because we knew what Iran was going to try to strike and we knew there tragic moment. There could be a tragic moment where something could get through. Of course, that's the consequence of conflict and we remember those six every single day. But don't play games with
▶ 4:01:02I'm not playing games. I want to finish with one more quote
▶ 4:01:05from a survivor of the attack and this on the record. Telling the truth is important and we're not going to learn from these mistakes if we pretend these mistakes didn't happen. Secretary Hath, those soldiers told the truth. Those soldiers are braver than you are. They are asking for accountability. They deserve accountability. And I'm asking for the same, starting with you. And as I said a year ago, you need to resign
▶ 4:01:34I commend those.
▶ 4:01:35I yield back.
▶ 4:01:36Gentleman yields back. Chair now recognizes a gentleman from Texas, Mr.
▶ 4:01:40Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary Hagath, I want to tell you something right now. You focused our military once again and finally, and you've shaped it into the meritocracy, and you've dramatically increased the United States's ability to project power and when needed, lethality. And I mean, and as a result, our deterrents have never been more evident the world over. So, thank you, General Kane. You mentioned in your opening remarks, George Marshall.
▶ 4:02:08Unfortunately, some of your immediate uh were clearly one one type of a general. They were Democratic generals. One of them, even in this committee, uh used politically charged rhetoric of the left. And I don't want Democratic generals. And for that matter, I don't want Republican generals either. I want American generals. You, sir, are an American general.
▶ 4:02:30You know exactly what we're We need generals, a joint chief of staff that knows, understands, respects, and embodies your role to serve this republic, the troops, and the mission. And that is precisely what you're doing. And I want to thank you because you do remind me of George C. Marshall. He was a great American, and so are you. Secretary what do you know of any nation state that ever enriched uranium to 60% that then didn't make a nuclear weapon?
▶ 4:02:58Well, first of all, I want to second your comments about the chairman and I agree. I appreciate how he does his job. Uh, usually when a country uh pursues at that level, it's pursuing a nuclear
▶ 4:03:10100% of the countries that have reached 60% enrichment have then produced a nuclear weapon. Uh, and is it true that that you Iran was in the process of building such a swarm of UAVs and ballistic missile shield conventionally once they wanted to bake the cake because they had all the ingredients to make the nuclear weapon, it would have been damn near impossible for us or anyone else to prevent them.
▶ 4:03:31As I pointed to, the president was wise enough to understand that at a at its weakest moment following the 12-day war in Midnight Hammer, now was the time to degrade their conventional capabilities, the umbrella they were building of missiles, longrange, short-range cruise missiles, one-way attack drones that they were going to use to blackmail the countries around them to not do anything about their nuclear program when they broke out from 60%. We know that to be a they knew that to be their intention and something had to be done about it and President Trump had the courage to do it.
▶ 4:03:59Well, President Trump, there's been a lot of quotes uh that people have been mentioning, his words, and I wanted to mention some that I thought were interesting. Here's a quote. I will take no options off the table to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Barack Obama, Iran will never get a nuclear weapon. Joe Biden, I will never hesitate to take whatever action necessary and I will never allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons. All options are on the table. Camala Harris in this one. We would totally obliterate Iran.
▶ 4:04:25That's a terrible thing to say, but those people who run Iran need to understand that Hillary Clinton 2008. So, it seems to me that Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Camala Harris, and Donald Trump had something in common. They weren't going to allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon. And some of them, four of them were all words, and one of them took action. There's 93 million. We're involved in a land war in Asia. I get it. It's complicated. 93 million people, much larger than Iraq, but 80% of their country hates their guts.
▶ 4:04:54This is a regime that murdered 40,000 of them and gunned them down in the streets. They're responsible over 600 American deaths. how long was World War II? You have any idea? Uh, in days. I I have it right here. In days, exactly.
▶ 4:05:07I got it multiplied by 365, but
▶ 4:05:09yeah, it's 1347 days. Korea was a,29 and our involvement World War I, which is rather quick, was 585. How long we've been involved in Iran? Just shy of 60 6 days.
▶ 4:05:2460 zero days. Two months. And what is the degradation of their navy right now,
▶ 4:05:29Uh their conventional conventional navy is destroyed. They had uh three drone aircraft carriers. They have none. They had 11 submarines. They had none. They had uh different frigate classes. They have none. They may have small speedboats at this point, Coast Guard type vessels, but their conventional navy is gone.
▶ 4:05:45Air Force
▶ 4:05:46likewise. Uh functionally destroyed.
▶ 4:05:48Command and control. uh they it's hard for them. It's there's a reason why there's a challenge in in communicating around a deal is because their command and control is fundamentally broken as far as who's in control and how they
▶ 4:06:00We could make very good arguments that the serious nature of any action in a country like Iran. There's there were good things to consider before doing it. There were also very good reasons to do it. The fact of the matter is, ladies and gentlemen, Republicans, Democrats, we're here now. This is an evil regime. We can fundamentally reshape not only that the region, but the world. They were the largest exporter of terror and ballistic missile technologies. We need gentlemen to win.
▶ 4:06:31Secretary General Kaine win. I yield back. Gentleman yields back. Chair and I recognize a gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Duzio.
▶ 4:06:39Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh we all just heard pretty powerful reporting uh courtesy of Mr. Ryan uh from many of our wounded troops who were injured in the attack in Kuwait. Uh Mr. Secretary, you heard direct quotes from some of them uh via CBS's reporting. They were willing to talk to the press. Things like they were unprepared to provide any defense for themselves in the unit. Things like we were moved closer to Iran to a deeply unsafe area that was a known target.
▶ 4:07:09your spokesperson, Sean Parnell, in response to that reporting said it was not true. Do you agree with that? He's calling these guys liars. Um, I'm not calling our troops liars, and I don't know if what you're representing is is correct or not. I'll take you at your word on that. But all I know is that we took every effort possible at the commencement of this campaign to ensure the defense of our troops to include moving them off of known bases to places that were not known. And we had intel Understood.
▶ 4:07:38Secretary known and then those were fortified with bunkers and other fortifications with theater air defenses. Was our concern that something I'm going to pause you there. I'm I'm going to give you absolutely disparaging me that I don't care.
▶ 4:07:50I'm asking you whether you think they're liars or not. You are disparaging me that I don't care about the passing of our troops. Thought they're liars.
▶ 4:07:57That's disparaging and smearing in every way. Nobody cares more about the fate of our troops. Nobody cares about the health of our troops. Nobody wants to bring them all hope more than
▶ 4:08:06I understand. But he controls the time. He controls the time. You get to control your answer.
▶ 4:08:12And the gentleman's right.
▶ 4:08:14If we're allowed to answer,
▶ 4:08:15Mr. Chairman, thank you, Secretary. My question was clear whether you thought they were liars or not. You don't seem to want to answer it. We can move on. The other part of what your spokesman said, and you just reiterated here, was that, and I'm quoting your spokesman, every possible measure has been taken to safeguard our troops. End quote. You're mean to tell us. Let's I'll give you a chance to clarify. There is not a single additional thing he could have done to protect those troops who are now wounded, six of whom are dead.
▶ 4:08:40I'm telling you that as a department, we did every conceivable thing at my level and every echelon down to ensure the maximum force protection for our troops. We live in a in a dangerous world in a dangerous place against a determined enemy that can't have a nuclear weapon. And that requires sacrifice and risk. And it it tragically in this case it meant six Americans lost their lives and others were wounded. And I and we all know that and we all that's that's part of the cost.
▶ 4:09:06But it does not mean we didn't care and it doesn't doesn't mean we didn't ask you that. It doesn't mean we didn't do everything possible which we did.
▶ 4:09:12But what let's be clear about what was done. There were T- walls there. Essentially there was no overhead protection. The known threat in that environment I think we all here understand it is overhead drone strike. There was no protection for overhead drone strike. So I'm struggling to understand how your answer and your spokesman's answer is that every possible measure was taken. We can move on. Mr. Chairman uh Chairman Kane, I want to ask you something very a different topic. Um folks at home know you're the senior military officer in our armed services. They may not have as much of understanding of your role in the chain of command.
▶ 4:09:42You're outside the operational chain of command, but you are the presidents and the secretar's senior military adviser. So I want to ask a very basic thing. What you would expect our commanders in the in the field uh our troops to do should the enemy lay down their weapons and try to surrender. What would you expect commanders in the field to do?
▶ 4:10:03Well, sir, I think um I'll go back to something I said earlier with deep respect for your question, but I think you're trying to uh take me to a partisan place here, and I can't let you do that,
▶ 4:10:16General. I as always, I respect your desire to avoid it. I'm not trying to put you in a partis. And I and I know that, but I, you know, our our uh our officers and and enlisted service members always follow lawful orders. There's a checklist for them to do that and and uh I I just uh I I I'll stay in the middle.
▶ 4:10:35Understood. General Secretary, let me give you a chance and you've been asked about this earlier and you said in I think your press conference essentially and I'll quote you here, no quarter, no mercy for enemies. That's the end of the quote. Is your guidance that you expect our troops in harm's way if there's a foreign enemy surrendering, laying down their arms, they're supposed to provide no quarter and kill them? Um, you denied it, but you were indeed trying to take the chairman to a partisan place. That was General Millie.
▶ 4:11:04That was the previous administration, which played politics. We don't play
▶ 4:11:08It's a simple question. I'm asking you to win and we ensure the rules of engagements are such that our that our troops have every authority possible to
▶ 4:11:15I'll give you another chance. Do you in saying that, are you trying to tell commanders that that's what you expect? You're in the chain of command. It's a simple question.
▶ 4:11:23I understand that. My commanders know exactly what the guidance is with each and every mission and they know every toolary tooling effect. I think you speak volumes. I think that's a dangerous thing. We all know the expectations. We know the law of war. We know what is lawful. I'd expect our commanders to understand that as well. I yield back. Mr. Chairman,
▶ 4:11:40gentleman yields back. Chair recognizes a gentleman from Guam, Mr. Mland.
▶ 4:11:47Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary Headst, thank you for your continued uh attention to Guam. really appreciate it and while leading the war department here and I'd like to remind my colleagues uh that one of your first official trips as secretary was to visit Guam and during your confirmation hearing you identified the island as America's most strategic location globally and this commitment does not go unnoticed sir. So I thank you Mr. secretary for that.
▶ 4:12:17And as we continue our buildup uh for the defense of our nation in Guam and the people of Guam, uh as we have many uh active duties personnel, but we also have a lot of Department of War civilian personnel, too. And right now, one of our most consistent my most consistent question from my constituents have been asking is when would the living quarter allowance authorization for war department civilians in Guam? When will it be implemented?
▶ 4:12:45And recently your office confirmed that the guidance should be published early May. Will you work to keep that timeline? And will you work to ensure living quarter allowance will properly incentivize local hires to stay on Guam?
▶ 4:13:00Well, if that's what we stated, we need to stick with it. That's been our pledge and and I think uh it reiterates that uh the the amount we're paying on on to pay for housing and for quality of life and living at certain especially unique locations is usually mismatched and it causes staffing and workforce problems that we need to address in a tailored nature to some of those unique locations like Guam, like Hawaii and others in in Europe. So yes, we are we're committed to that. And I would just note that in our budget, we've got almost a billion for the Guam defense system.
▶ 4:13:29Also, we're investing in uh ensuring that that critical location you described is is part of our theater umbrella.
▶ 4:13:36Excellent, sir. Thank you for that. Uh, another long-standing request I have from the war department has been the increased support for Guam's power grid. As you know, we all uh the one island approach there and working together. Our water, our power, our port, our airports, our hospital, it's all in support uh working together with the military. But one of the important ones uh for us is Guam's um power grid.
▶ 4:14:06And most of Guam's grid is owned by the department and is leased to the Guam Power Authority. And as as the military demands uh upon the power grid increases, do you see either O and M funds or military construction funds being the best path for the department to support Guam's power grid needs?
▶ 4:14:33I would welcome your input first and foremost as we have throughout. Um, but as was noted, we've got 450 million for small modular reactors, which is a a new approach we're taking, which we think need makes our bases more resilient. If there's one place the American people count on, uh, being able to be prepared in that moment, it's our bases wherever they are, whether Konis or Okonis, uh, and these these reactors are a key part of getting at it. So, that would be part of how I would answer your question.
▶ 4:14:59I I appreciate that, Mr. Secretary. Also the Guam power authority is the only one in charge of all the transmission lines. So where that power source and I know they there was some consideration of the small nuclear reactors as well but the power authority will be the one transmission uh for the transmission lines for all the power on the island. So looking forward to working with your office. Thank you Mr. Secretary.
▶ 4:15:23Um, another deep concern for the people of Guam has been the cost of housing, which is often driven up by large numbers of servicemen living on base in Guam, off base on Guam. And I've been impressed by the recent efforts by joint regional maras to reduce the reliance on existing housing stock in both north and uh, south of Guam.
▶ 4:15:46Can you tell us how department housing uh strategy in Guam will work to keep homes affordable to locals and if uh and if increased private sector involvement would help address my constituents concerns?
▶ 4:16:02Well, we've got about four and a half billion for family housing in the FY27 budget. It's something we recognize as a challenge and in places like that a unique challenge. Uh there's also been a uh construction bureaucratic construction process which has been a huge impediment and you can imagine President Trump has demanded that we do something different and accelerate a different process to deliver those things in a more of a private sector less bureaucratic fashion and we look forward to employing those.
▶ 4:16:26Excellent sir. And and finally we did have one discussion when we first met in Guam regarding the Medal of Honor um possible recipients that are deserving of this. Now, Guam has never had any Medal of Honor uh recipients and there's three three names that we've
▶ 4:16:43gentleman's time's expired.
▶ 4:16:44Thank you.
▶ 4:16:45Uh I would like to point out, you know, once I recognize a member, they have control of that five minutes. If they want to give a speech, they can give a speech. If they want to ask questions, they can ask questions. But if you ask a question, I would hope you give witness a chance to answer. But if they choose not to, then the witness has to recognize it's their time and cut it off and go back to them. But I want to
▶ 4:17:07Sorry, Craig.
▶ 4:17:08I I want to be able respectful of each other and be able to to make sure we maximize the use of this time. But everybody has to understand it's the members five minutes. Uh once I recognize did the ranking member want to offer something?
▶ 4:17:19Yeah, I just want to second that. Yeah, it is members time. I do hope members, you know, you do ask a question. Got to allow for more than two words. uh you ask that they filibuster or don't answer the question, feel free to interrupt. But I hope we can keep this respectful and it's more productive for us and and for the witnesses and for those
▶ 4:17:34So, thank you, Mr. Chair.
▶ 4:17:35And with that, we will recognize a gentle lady from Hawaii, Mr. Cuda.
▶ 4:17:39Thank you, Mr. Chair. On February 2nd, President Trump said we should take over the voting in at least 15 places. The Republicans ought to nationalize the voting despite the Constitution assigning primary responsibility for elections to the states. Federal law also draws very clear limits. Under 18 US Code section 592, military officers are prohibited from deploying troops or armed personnel to polling places unless necessary to repel armed enemies of the United States. That is this exception.
▶ 4:18:09Not politics, not suspicion, not conspiracy theories. Armed enemies. Secretary Heg said, "Do you think American voters are enemies of the United States?" A simple yes and no or Um, I think uh legal voters I think everybody who's legal should vote? Yes.
▶ 4:18:26So, American voters are not enemies of the United States? Yes. You're agreeing with me?
▶ 4:18:31I think America's legal citizens should vote. Yes.
▶ 4:18:34How many armed enemies of the United States have attempted to interfere in the last election?
▶ 4:18:41can you recall any time when armed enemies of the United States attempted to fear in the last election or the 2020 election? We just had the king of England here. That a while ago, but
▶ 4:18:52so 250 years ago. Okay. Very good. All right. Well, Secretary Hex said, "If President Trump ordered you to deploy troops to polling places during the midterm elections this fall, which would violate the law I just cited, would you implement his order? Yes or no?"
▶ 4:19:08What you're trying to insinuate is that the president would give unlawful orders and we would somehow deploy troops as a result. And the evidence of our department is that we've worked alongside law enforcement very effectively for 15 months. Uh Los Angeles would have been on fire for the summer had we not come across
▶ 4:19:22I I disagree with that. But this is not a hypothetical situation that I'm inferring on your president in January of this year told the New York Times that he regretted not ordering the National Guard to seize voting machines in key states after the 2020 election. Last I heard from you, the last time we had any kind of armed enemies at any type of voting places was 250 years ago. We're talking 2020. So if the president, again, I'm asking you, orders you to break election law, violate the constitution and the law, would you follow the orders of the president? Yes or no?
▶ 4:19:53The president, you like to insinuate that the president issued a simple question and does not. Who would you follow? The president or the
▶ 4:20:00I will note that in 2024 troops were Joe Biden. By the way, Joe Biden were deployed to polling locations in 15 states. 2024 Joe Biden troops deployed to polling locations in 15 states. Explain that one to me.
▶ 4:20:13I am asking you a question now. You seem to really like Joe Biden. You've brought his name up more than many other topics today. Answer the question. Who are you beholden to, Mr. Secretary? The president or the constitution?
▶ 4:20:27Well, I very question in Los Angeles. He couldn't answer that either. So, I think our answer is very clear. Obviously, you have taken a loath of loyalty only to the president and not the people of this country. Let's move on now and let's talk about AI. The Marvin smart system, which appears to be the program on record being used in Iran, does the targeting work we know of about 2,000 people called the Maven system, not the Marvin system.
▶ 4:20:54Excuse me. Thank you so much for that correction. It does it in a fraction of the time. The intention was to compress the kill chain and the result was an attack that killed almost 200 children. Would you agree that tragic actions like this prove that when we trade time and humans for safety, people die? Uh the Maven system is a very effective tool.
▶ 4:21:20Uh and inside that we use we have very prescriptive processes by which we ensure uh as much precision as humanly possible in very complex battlefield. Do you think we took every absolute effort to make sure that innocent civilians did not die in this attack?
▶ 4:21:37I know that there is no country on planet earth that takes more measures to ensure that civilian harm or civilian casualties are minimized than the United States of America and this war department. And that is a fact in
▶ 4:21:48Okay. And yet, uh, Mr. Secretary, you eliminated the department's civilian harm reduction staff. you eliminate it. For a country that does takes great efforts, makes great efforts to make sure human casualties are reduced or eliminated. Don't you think that that goes actually counter to what you just said? Would these children not still be alive if you had not eliminated all of these staff working within SenCom?
▶ 4:22:14We didn't eliminate them. We made sure that they those things that they normally accomplish are at the field level, which they are. And all of these processes are in place at every level.
▶ 4:22:23Something clearly has failed. Whether it's our implementation of AI, whether it's understanding our human dependence on AI, would you not agree something failed because almost 200 children died in Iran as a result of our bombing.
▶ 4:22:37Uh you're you're insinuating something where an investigation is not complete.
▶ 4:22:40Gentle times expired. Chair now recognizes a gentleman from Georgia, Dr.
▶ 4:22:45Thank you, Mr. Chair. Gentlemen, I'm uh happy to have you here today and really excited about the things you've been able to accomplish. Uh just to I'm gonna summarize just just sitting here for a few minutes listening to everybody politicize what we've done. I'm just going to break it down as best as I can and then I'm going to let you answer a couple questions.
▶ 4:23:06First of all, just since the short period of time that the Trump administration has taken over, we've handed over control of Ukraine's destiny to Europe where it belongs. Uh a a conglomerate that has a 20 trillion dollar economy versus a $2 trillion Russian economy to actually take care of their own country in a very good way, their own continent.
▶ 4:23:29Uh, we've kept Iran, who has literally talked about raining down fire from heaven and talked about us being the great Satan, from becoming a nuclear power. We've reshaped the geopolitical space in the Persian Gulf. We've reestablished the Monroe Doctrine in the Western Hemisphere. Uh, we've uh executed two of the most amazing raids in history uh almost flawlessly uh that will be studied for a generation at least.
▶ 4:23:58Uh, we've reduced senior administrative billets. Thank you. We've defeated Iran with under $30 billion with minimal civilian casualties compared to any other war. People forget that in World War II in one night we we lost 100,000 civilians, totally innocent, and fire bombings. That's before we dropped the nuclear bombs. War is a horrible thing. But I think we've executedly as best as possible in a in a very hard and consequential environment.
▶ 4:24:27That's just to sum up a few things. Not to mention the recruiting that went from dismal and and really something that could have crippled our military to now a surplus just by a change in That's pretty impressive for a short period of time. Thank you and I commend you for your your hardship uh overcoming those hardships. Um a couple things that I wanted to get through. One thing is we talked about the incentivized saving act which is something I wanted to apply to all bureaucracies.
▶ 4:24:51When I was in the military as both an operational officer and a logistics officer for my squadrons and my jump places, um we got to the end of fiscal year, if we didn't spend it, what happens? We lose it. We get our budget shrank. Everybody knows that in the military, everybody knows that in every bureaucracy in America. One of the things I came up with is at the end of the fiscal year, if you don't spend it, you don't have anything. You know, we save 10% of our budget for emergencies like we're racing right now. If you don't spend it, instead of spending it, you actually can save half of it. 49% rolls over the next year.
▶ 4:25:2149% goes back to debt and deficit. 2% to reward the people for being good administrators of of the money. I don't see any downside. This is the way that we reinvent government, the way we spend money. And I just thought I wanted your opinion on something like that. I thought was thinking outside the box because I've seen ways fraud abuse. We're trying to address that. This should be a bipartisan biccameal approach to actually doing something right as we expand the budget but also give us some wiggle room for putting money back and being good stewards of the people's money. What do you think about an idea like that?
▶ 4:25:51Um, I like I very much like an idea like that which creates all the right kinds of incentives. And I would just add in addition to that, which is the type of thing our department would support. The the deals that we're cutting with these private sector companies on munitions ensures they build the plants, they build the assembly lines, which is exactly the right kind of incentive. If you spend on cap on uh on facilities, you're going to make sure you make money on those facilities and the munitions that you produce. there's there's ownership in that stake.
▶ 4:26:22There's the right incentive. The overturning the entire way that the the the the department does uh does business. So, I agree with that. We're pointing at the defense contractors that the president has and saying you need to do your your business differently. This is not a gravy train of the government. You need to be you're beholden to us actually. So, I think we're we're the spirit of that is infused into everything we're doing at the department. And I think it's right in line with what you're talking about running it more like a business where we have accountability and we're pointing in the right direction. We do have a lot of old programs that we need to update.
▶ 4:26:52Um, one of the things you talked about is a five to seven year period of time of updating. I think almost yearbyear now is going to be how we're going to have to look at how we budget things and contract because the technologies are so dramatic as as General Ka pointed out. Um, I know I'm running out of time real quickly, but I want to also revisit the fact that, uh, you are still invited down to University of North Georgia, one of the elite eight schools. Uh, we're looking forward to PTN with you.
▶ 4:27:16Appreciate you guys being here today. God bless you and God bless our military service members. With that, you
▶ 4:27:20sir, I got to say this guy over my left shoulder is a University of North Georgia graduate. He doesn't want me to tell you that, but he is.
▶ 4:27:28The president would be very uh happy. The president of the university, he's great. President Shannon would be very happy to hear that. Thank you. Time's expired. Chair, I recognize gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. Davis.
▶ 4:27:37Thank you, Mr. Chair. Also, thank you, Mr. Secretary, Chairman Kaine, and Mr. Hurst. Shout out to Winterville. 13 US service members killed, 13 forever changed. 13 heroes who put the uniform on, paid the ultimate sacrifice. We owe remembrance those families. Just want you to know we see you. We stand with you.
▶ 4:28:04We'll never forget their gold star families who are here today sitting in the room carrying the honor and remember flags. Remember the sacrifice. And when we do so, words can't fully capture it. April the 3rd, F-15 E Strike Eagle pilots were rescued because we live by a simple promise. We do not leave anyone behind. The same spirit must be extended to those who are killed in action.
▶ 4:28:32That's why I raise arise again today and raised this question of the importance of passing HR 1363 honor and remember flag recognition. Mr. Secretary, I raised this with you before and actually I come today to thank thank you for the response from your office and actually engaging with us in this. I rise again today and bring this up because we must never lose sight of the true cost of war.
▶ 4:28:58As we commemorate 250 years in this country, the first call for independence, Halifax County, delegates move forth with the first official action in my district. Our service members are the reason we are here They've delivered freedom.
▶ 4:29:17And I believe it would be amazing if we could deliver for their families, those who've sacrificed this flag, something to help them ideally by Memorial Day or at least commemorate their families. I was simply asked, do you have any thoughts whatsoever how we continue to lift and honor those who have been killed serving our country? Well, thank you for what you do on that topic.
▶ 4:29:47Uh I think first and foremost, we do it by doing right by the legacy of those that we lose, whether it's those 13 from this conflict or any other conflict. Um, I've been at Dover every single time, as has the chairman, as is the president, the vice president when they can, to greet that and respect and honor that. Uh, in our department, we established the first ever gold star task force um where we've got a gold star advocate right in our front office working these issues on a daily basis, which is why it would doesn't surprise me that we so quickly got back to you.
▶ 4:30:15These are passion, these are deep in our DNA, things that we care about. how you treat a family
▶ 4:30:21who's given everything in that moment, not just at Dover, but in every step of that process is a reflection.
▶ 4:30:26Mr. Secretary, thank you truly um just for time here and I'd served mortuary and I've been to do I deployed to do do so. So, thank you there. I want to shift to Army Cadet Command. The senior RTC programs rebalance optimization plan. North Carolina Central University in particular, their real access and logistical challenges that are before the cadetses.
▶ 4:30:53And when we think about building the next generation of leaders, I would just ask us to think about how we're putting barriers in front of some. And I would just ask if quickly if you could please take a closer look at the impact on the cadetses. I want to shift to another topic and um really spend the last moment here as I'm running short. Uh uh your memo, April memo, the nonofficial personal protection arming the department of war um property.
▶ 4:31:23Um my son is at Fort Benning right now infantry. He's training ideally. he wants to be 11 Bravo. And I shared the memo with them and he shared it with his battle buddies to see the response and he's definitely second amendment enthused um and advocate and they're really interested, you know, in this. Um my question is simple. Um how do you plan to provide any guidance on the denials and how do you plan to track it?
▶ 4:31:53I'm that was the intent is to make sure those men and women out there feel like they have their second amendment rights even when they're on post and the burden of proof is on the command to as to why they would deny as opposed to the burden and proof on why they should allow. So the presumption is the same rights they would have outside the gate of a base they have inside uh for personal protection purposes. Our bases shouldn't be gun-free zones except for the armory uh and the MPs. So the the burden approved is something we're going to pay very close
▶ 4:32:21my last 15 seconds. Uh Chairman Kaine, um thank you again for the conversation breakfast. Any final thoughts in terms of any reservations of how uh we're dealing with munitions um in terms of a supplement on the depletion of
▶ 4:32:38Gentleman's time's expired chair. I recognize a gentleman from Louisiana, Mr. Higgins.
▶ 4:32:42Thank you, Mr. Chairman. General Kaine, Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here today. Mr. Secretary, you stated in your opening statement one of the foundational endeavors that you embrace is to, in your words, forge a lethal arsenal of I don't think it could be more accurately described
▶ 4:33:14the spirit that you gentlemen are delivering within the department of war, the men and women that you serve. It's it's it's notable for an American like me, Army veteran, 65 years old.
▶ 4:33:32I don't believe in my lifetime I've witnessed this level of rebirth and and hardcore focus that I'm witnessing out of the Pentagon right And I just commend you for driving that.
▶ 4:33:52And please know that you have a great deal of support not just in this body and on this committee but across the regular Americans that have served or have families that have served have taken note. General, you said your opening statement that have called upon we win our wars around the world.
▶ 4:34:18Those are your words and we're going to make certain through this committee that you have the support, the equipment, and the funding that you need to, if called upon, win wars across the world. But we expect a lot out of you gentlemen. We we expect you to liberate and secure the entire Western Hemisphere.
▶ 4:34:44One of my colleagues across the aisle stated that in a negative way. Let me flip it to positive. We absolutely do expect you to liberate and secure the entire Western We expect you to drive Iran to its knees and free the world of the Iranian terrorist threat. We expect you to leverage NATO into an indomitable force. We expect you to set China back on its heels worldwide.
▶ 4:35:14We expect you to to drive peace and stability through the projection of military power. We expect you to secure the transit of affordable, transportable American energy product as the indisputable cornerstone of economic prosperity for every allied nation. That's a lot of expectations.
▶ 4:35:36and what you gentlemen have laid out today as as you've answered questions solid, you've made it clear that that's the path we're on and I support you.
▶ 4:35:48My Democrat colleagues have have made it clear today that after careful study and thorough research of world history, they've come to the conclusion that soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines are far safer if they're never deployed into You made it very clear that you take your business seriously and we support I certainly do. Mr.
▶ 4:36:14Secretary, in consultation with your staff, reflective of your goals and your mission and your your your stated intentions, in consultation with your staff at personnel and readiness, I propose legislation to codify your guidance that combat fitness standards must be rigorous with no separate scoring scales, adjusted standards, or accommodations for there to be only a single uncompromising standard not to exclude any American
▶ 4:36:44from any opportunity, but to ensure we have the best, most capable Americans in the most critical positions. Would you welcome this body making your guidance into law in the NDAA?
▶ 4:36:57I would welcome, Congressman.
▶ 4:36:58Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for clarifying that. Um, a question about Iran, and I'll give you the the final 30 seconds to answer. Was Iran moving precipitously nuclear weapons capability? Mr.
▶ 4:37:16even after the obliteration of Midnight Hammer, what was clear is that the intention of Iran remained in the pursuit of nuclear weapons and after as as hard as they were hit by Israel, it created an opportunity to get rid of the conventional shield. That's why we talked about missile production and the Navy and the defense industrial base to set them back from blackmailing the region and the world in pursuit of nuclear weapons because we understood how much they could continue to pursue
▶ 4:37:42Roger that. Thank you, gentlemen. Mr. Chairman, I yield.
▶ 4:37:44Gentleman's time is expired. Chair and I recognize gentleman from California, Mr.
▶ 4:37:49Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh thank you and the ranking member for bringing us here today for this hearing. Very important to the nation. I want to thank our witnesses uh for all being here today. Um, Mr. Secretary, the president recently made an announcement that the state activated National Guard would start receiving active duty pay for federal missions. And I believe you kind of made similar remarks as well. I'm happy to see that announcement because it brought the muchneeded attention to this disparity.
▶ 4:38:16Um whether you agree with missions or not, when when Guardmen are called up for active duty and they really have no choice in the matter for homeland often they are receiving inconsistent pay and benefits depending on their status. This issue has persisted for decades. This is why earlier this year, Rep. Bergman and I introduced Duty Status Reform Act, which would address the issue head on. I believe this is the right time to push this over the finish line. It's something the National Guards Bureau supports.
▶ 4:38:45The Council of Governor support uh just the other week. Service the the service personnel chiefs were all here. They support it. TAG support it. So, Mr. Secretary, as a former member of the National Guard, I am asking you here today, would you consider supporting consolidating the 29 duty status stat statuses for the military reserve component into a balanced and equitable system that would also help the National Guard receive retirement points when
▶ 4:39:15they're called up for these federal missions? Would you support that?
▶ 4:39:20Congressman, thank you for your efforts on this. It makes a ton of sense and we support these efforts for duty status reform in pursuit of things that work for the department and for the troops because they deserve the kind of uh pay and benefits that are commensurate with active duty troops. So, we would look forward to working with your office uh to to get at duty status reform. I think now is the right time.
▶ 4:39:41Thank you for that. General Kaine, I ask you the same question. as a an individual who's served in the Air National Guard, would you consider supporting duty status reform that's going to simplify this and help our National Guards troop?
▶ 4:39:54Sure. I'll I'll be careful to stay in my lane. My personal, not the chairman's opinion, as somebody who's lived the House of Pain of 30 different duty statuses would support it. As the chairman, I'll leave personnel, and you know this from your prior life, to our civilian leaders who do that. But I do think we owe a better set of options for our guardsmen and our reserveists across the forces.
▶ 4:40:16Well, thank you both for that. This is something that I think needs to get done and something I've been working on for years now. Uh the National Guard Bureau supports it and so I hope you will, like you said, work with us to get that done. OM is seems to be our roadblock. So, I'm hoping you can kind of push that roadblock down so that we can finally get this done. Um, next question. Mr. Secretary, um I take what we do for our personnel very seriously and that sometimes I I know you have stated right here today, our troops are ready.
▶ 4:40:44They will do anything if asked upon them. But I think as leaders sometimes we need to kind of protect them as well. Um and I worry about the USS Ford which has now kind of been out there over 10 months. It's probably well over 300 days by the time it gets back to the United States. I just saw a thing today. It's going to be headed back here in a a few days. Um, you know, these people have gone back pretty much all over the world. They crossed the equator multiple times.
▶ 4:41:11Um, but I am interested, you know, I'm sure that was not in the gift map when it was first assigned, when they were deployed. And so, what were some of the concerns, you know, that the Navy had when you made this modification, when it was brought forward to you, that, hey, this is what extending them out to past 10 months is going to do. This is, you know, both on the troops and on the ship. What concerns did the Navy bring up for this?
▶ 4:41:35Um, it's a very fair question and I can tell you every week I stare at an orders book uh where I'm looking at troop movements or asset movements and and multiple times that included the Ford and multiple times the operational requirements whether it was down in the in uh in Southcom or up to Sentcom demanded additional assets in real time which which through a tough decision-making process led to an extension in consultation with the Navy. Admiral Codle and his staff, uh, they fairly represented readiness trade-offs, maintenance trade-offs, which are
▶ 4:42:05real concerns. What What trade-offs are we making right here? I mean, really, we have three carriers in the area right now. How many do we really need? It's rather I know it's a a great show of force, but do we really need three carriers there and you got one arg there and another one on the way, you know, this is going to set back possibly deployments later on. It's going to have ramifications down the road extending for this much. And not only talking about, you know, we had service members that were kept away from their family for almost a year.
▶ 4:42:33How many missed the birth of a child, you know, before, you know, extending them in and another four months. We need to keep this in consideration. We kind of make these modifications and I hope these issues are being raised when you do these ESOB books, right? And people are actually making these decision.
▶ 4:42:49Gentleman's time expired. I recognize a gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Magcguire. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to our um witnesses today. Um Secretary Hegsth, I really appreciate your return to warrior ethos and the priorities of our military. Merit over performance is how you win. It's how you save lives. And your love of our military comes out in everything you say. So, we really support you and your team and what you're doing.
▶ 4:43:15General Kaine, uh your um comments about being in the middle and being apolitical also saves lives. I think all the uh fellow veterans in this room, military guys, would agree that if somebody saved your life on the battlefield, you wouldn't care if they're a male or female, black or white, Democrat, Republican, independent, whatever. We're all Americans and we're all on the same team. And we put our differences aside and work as a team, we can turn the impossible to a possible.
▶ 4:43:44We can be outnumbered and still win. So, I want to commend you guys for supporting our troops so they can best survive. Uh let's see the border. Nobody talks about the border, Mr. Secretary, as you say, but it's incredible what you guys did in just a matter of weeks.
▶ 4:43:58The missions in Ukraine, Honduras, I don't know any other military in history who would has been able to successfully do something so complicated, but it talks to the unity and the teamwork of all the sort uh the joint force and how well they work together. I got a lot of questions. I'll try to go fast. $1.5 trillion budget. Um, in that budget, I want to echo what Rep. Jackson said about US SOCOM.
▶ 4:44:25We are often uh deploy deploy deploy deploy and we seem to be doing more with less and we don't complain and they won't be that voice. So for us in Congress, we want to be that voice is just take a look at the budget and see if we can can help them with that. Also, um, I want to talk to you guys about solid rocket motors.
▶ 4:44:44I know that the Secretary of War I know that in this budget we've uh we've picked one particular company that we put a lot of money in and I think it's a great company and they do a great job, but what is your plan to also have other companies come to the table to help us with a shortfall with Solid Rocket
▶ 4:45:01You're right on on SOCOM and we will absolutely work with you and look at that on Solid Rocket Motors. It's such a critical component. You got to go with your fastest runner uh to get caught up as as quickly as you can and giving them incentives. But you we've also learned on multiple domains that just one option means zero options uh when you're stuck you know one is z two is one one is none. Uh so we need multiple avenues on that approach and we look forward to finding other companies that can do it as well.
▶ 4:45:27Thank you General Kane. National Guard. I'm thinking about counter drone with FIFA coming up Super Bowls and all these things going on. Have you considered, and if you haven't, will you consider uh training National Guardsmen? Send them to counter drone schools so they can come back and train law enforcement so we can increase our ability to protect uh critical infrastructure.
▶ 4:45:48Sir, uh for sure they they may already be doing that. Please let me take that one and come back to you. I know the title 32 force in advance of all the domestic things that are on the horizon here with America's 250 are looking at a range of capabilities. If you be okay, we'll we'll get back to you.
▶ 4:46:04On Ukraine, whoever could answer this is um you know, they have 60% enriched uranium. They say they have enough to build 11 bombs. And even at 60%, is that enough to make a dirty bomb? Is that a yes or no? Does anybody have an answer for that?
▶ 4:46:20I mean, I wouldn't want to state anything that might be classified. So, I would talk about that in this setting. And by the way, in World War II, a congressman was in a closed briefing and learned that the reason the Japanese hadn't sunk any US submarines is they didn't know our submarines could go below 250 ft. So, he went out to the media and told them that and we started losing submarines and losing American sailors. So, a lesson for all of us in Congress, be careful how we uh So, thank you for considering that. Um, I would say this.
▶ 4:46:48If they had a nuclear bomb, would that kill hundreds of people potentially, thousands of people potentially, or millions of people The history shows us what the lethal potential is of a nuclear weapon. And so, you'd have to assume the higher end of that raid range. And given the radical nature of this regime and the likelihood of them to use it, it gives you a sense of the threat.
▶ 4:47:11Well, I think the threat is too great to wait. And I have to commend this president, President Trump for having the fortitude and the secretary of war and the U joint force for making sure we stop this threat for the world. Also, I'm a big supporter of the AH64 Apache. I understand and operations um uh absolute resolve and everything else. It's been very effective in countering drones. I'm glad that in the NDAA we're keeping that program going. And I just saw that you're going to keep the A-10 program going.
▶ 4:47:40And a good friend of mine said, "Long live the warthog." But if there's ways that we can bring some of the warthogs back and or um are there any other capabilities that could replace the warthog? I don't think so. Is there anything that can do what the warthog does?
▶ 4:47:54Gentleman's time's expired. Chair and I recognize a gentleman from Illinois, Mr.
▶ 4:47:58Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh to General Kaine, on behalf of myself and my constituents, we thank you for your service and your leadership uh to our military men and women. um to our service members and and the veterans that I see um in our committee today. Um thank you for your support of our great country. Um Mr.
▶ 4:48:16Hegsth, I hear from your officials in our briefings here on the Hill and because I live in an army town, I now hear from neighbors at the grocery store who are worried about our munition stockpiles that are now down to critical levels and um and they sure don't want another forever war. So, Mr. Secretary, first of all, talk to us about the need to renew munition stockpiles and tell us what happens when munition stockpiles become depleted.
▶ 4:48:44Well, first of all, I I would note that as you know, we give weekly briefings on munitions to this committee. So, it's not something that's withheld from any of the members here. We appreciate that
▶ 4:48:53and but it's also a a topic that isn't something that should be publicly discussed uh as far as any shortfalls that may exist. But I would assure you that there are not shortfalls that exist in our ability to execute the missions around the world. And the reason we're investing in the defense industrial base with $ 1.5 trillion is to make sure the greatest companies in the world which have been falling behind for decades are running faster than ever before to give us 2x 3x 4x of the critical munitions.
▶ 4:49:20Your Patriots, your THAs, your SM3s, uh every other st standard missile. And
▶ 4:49:25and my my neighbors work really hard to make sure that we can
▶ 4:49:28jobs in America. It's what our war fighters need.
▶ 4:49:31So, could you tell me why we're firing the people at Joint Munitions Command for no cause other than just telling them they're overhired or their surplus
▶ 4:49:40I would joint munitions command.
▶ 4:49:42I would have to look into the particular circumstances of that, but there have been places where we haven't been moving fast enough with munitions. And when people don't move fast enough in the Department of War, we find someone else that will run fast.
▶ 4:49:52This is Joint Munitions Command. I mean, your department says that you're prioritizing munitions. Yet you cut 58% of joint munitions command at Rock Island. But let me move on. My district is also
▶ 4:50:02munitions are not built by commands. Munitions are built by
▶ 4:50:05they're the ones that are
▶ 4:50:06and we are very good at building commands and bureaucracies and slapping three and four star generals in charge of things that don't move things any faster. Our job is to unleash the power if we don't have joint munitions command. But let me move on. We also have Army Sustainment Command in my district. Could you tell me why we're firing folks at Army Sustainment Command when now is the time that we should be giving our soldiers every piece of sustainment that we can give them?
▶ 4:50:31Because, as I've stated, the status quo at this department before the Trump administration was unacceptable and changes had to be made. Do you think it's acceptable to fire veterans from jobs where they've been, you know, I I talked to my neighbors and at at the Arsenal and they've worked there 20, 30 years on top of their service to this country and they're doing it exemplary. Great performers will always have a job at the Department of War and when you reestablish merit, sometimes things happen. But we're grateful for all the vets that serve.
▶ 4:50:58And in fact, we've created a Patriot pipeline for service members to get into the defense industrial-based manufacturing business to consider that as a second career. So, we're leaning into vets and service members as the workforce of the future in our department.
▶ 4:51:11And this isn't me. I mean, they tell me that, you know, they feel you're taking a wrecking ball to the civilian workforce. But, you know, I I want to go and follow up on um Congressman Norcross's questions about why you terminated collective bargaining earlier this month. This affects hundreds of thousands of hardworking DoD employees. So, many of them are veterans who have honorably served our country. Um, you testified that if you work hard, you do the work, you keep your job, but that's not what's happening. And you allege it is is being done to maximize efficiency.
▶ 4:51:41Explain that.
▶ 4:51:42I should Yeah, I thank you asking that question. I' I'd love to clarify. Uh, I fundamentally believe the Department of War should not be subject to collective bargaining. Full stop.
▶ 4:51:52So, people shouldn't be able to fight for good wages and being treated well. I think our department does a great job evaluating and providing uh pay and benefits for folks across
▶ 4:52:02I would love to invite you to the Rock Island Arsenal so you can look these patriots in the eyes and tell them that um how does creating chaos for long-term civilian workers actually maximize efficiency. Um do you have any comment on that? There are plenty of examples of shipyards and other manufacturing plants where there are restraints that limit the hours, limit the ability of of leaders to ensure we're providing meeting the goals we're supposed to. And I don't think we should live to those
▶ 4:52:29Okay. Okay. Well, you know what? I want to use the rest of my time to the men and women of our armed forces. Please go forth with the integrity and the morality that you've carried before this administration took us down a path that has allies turning away and American citizens objecting. do what's right even if you're asked to do otherwise. Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
▶ 4:52:49Gentleman yields back. Chair and I recognize a gentleman from Florida, Mr. Mills. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, uh, Mr. Secretary, General Kaine, and the honorable. We'd love to just thank you for this opportunity, for coming here, and for continuing to push forward the war fighter ethos, for making sure that the realities, regardless what's said in here, are the realities on the battlefield that we're getting day in and day out. I ask the chairman for unanimous consent to enter a couple of documents into record
▶ 4:53:15without objection.
▶ 4:53:17I'll be entering into record my DD214 published in 2003 indicating my Bronze Star and other wartime medals and decorations. I'd also like to present the document provided by the Department of the Army in 2024 that also authorizes vets and verifies all medals and/or awards as well as a document by Paul Seitzky, former special forces member that annotates the two explosions that I was involved in in Baghdad. Without objection, so ordered.
▶ 4:53:46Mr. Secretary, as you know, you're pretty familiar with the ideas of slander, defamation, and attack on character. So, I apologize for having to take that moment to be able to go ahead and correct the record, but it was necessary. I would also note that my OMF file that was foyed by the Department of the AR or that was foyed was actually released by the Department of the Army the same day as yours was. So, everything is sitting on the actual website itself if people aren't too lazy to look at it.
▶ 4:54:13Secretary Hath, thank you for your testimony and for the time that you have here today. As the chairman noted, President Trump's incredible $ 1.5 trillion investment into our national defense is set to reverse the years of atrophy that our uh defense industrial base has faced over time, especially small innovative businesses uh and needs of a solid demand that signal that our war department is ready to buy American. I witnessed myself as I was with you in Merit Island, Florida, as we went on the Arsenal tour.
▶ 4:54:42And unfortunately, I didn't get to do do the cool things like fly in a jet really quick and buzz around while we were all actually doing hard work here. But I wanted to just say, Mr. Secretary, that can you detail for us how the Department of War has eased the path for American small businesses to contract with the Well, Congressman, thank you for the question that that has been core to our mission is the recognition uh that we have a problem at the department, previously department of defense and now the department of war and that problem is us.
▶ 4:55:13That problem is our bureaucracy, our process that is meant to block out new competitors and protect existing primes and and there are great primes that provide great products and we continue to support them. But to build an arsenal of freedom, you need more than just five or more than just six. You need a entire network of small, medium, and large companies contributing to the US manufacturing and supply base delivering weapons ahead of schedule and under budget that don't only have defense business but also commercial business.
▶ 4:55:42Uh and and when we seed when we need something that can move quickly and adapt accordingly because there are multiple options. So the our acquisitions transformation uh a speech and and memo and directive we rolled out on that the arsenal of freedom tour going out there with the hard hats and saying you are part of the workforce you have the backs of our warriors just changing the entire dynamic to say you shouldn't have to sue the department in order to get a contract with the department we're opening the doors with with business small business loans with it cers sitter or DIU or OSC
▶ 4:56:13the office of strategic capital hasn't even been discussed today $20 billion that gets levered into 200 00 billion dollars so that companies can invest in ways they otherwise wouldn't have the capital to do and it's not on our balance sheet. So we've got businessmen the deputy secretary of war who should be deemed a national asset uh for what he understands and how he works. We're opening the aperture of our department in historic ways uh and I think our m I know our manufacturing base is going to see the benefit from
▶ 4:56:40Thank you so much. But I also want to thank you for your due diligence and making sure that task force audit will come forward and we will see the Department of War for the first time in 2028 with a clean audit. Something that the previous administration was never able to do and many before that. I believe it was 28 years if I'm not mistaken, Mr. Secretary, since we've had a clean audit.
▶ 4:56:57That is right. And this is not a thing we just announced. We've been doing it for 15 months. Jay's been integally involved. We just launched a joint task force audit. We are going to pass an audit as a department by 2028 because the tax
▶ 4:57:10and this is why we're so honored to have you as our secretary of war and General Kaine, we are honored to have you as well leading our forces. Mr. Secretary, with the last few seconds I have from ships to bombs to bullets, our industrial base is in dire need of support. Even as these defense markers are strengthened as a former small business owner, I understand how bottlenecks can hold up good contracts and move from the speed that which we need for our war fighters. Mr. Secretary, can you detail how the department has moved uh to promote diversity in our defense industrial
▶ 4:57:42Well, if you will, can we submit for
▶ 4:57:48Sorry. Every aspect is opening it up to to provide as much running room for new entrance as possible.
▶ 4:57:53Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it. That I yield back.
▶ 4:57:56Chair now recognize a gentleman from New Mexico, Mr. Vasquez.
▶ 4:57:59Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you to our witnesses for being here today. Uh you're here before us requesting $1.5 trillion for the Defense Department, the LA the largest one-year increase since World War II. While I will recognize that your budget does include increases for pay and quality of life, these increases are outweighed by the rising costs of living and the department's ongoing failures on child care, education, medical care, and other quality of life factors.
▶ 4:58:25Just like other families, the soaring cost of gas, groceries, housing, and child care have left military families underwater. Yet, the department continues to put other priorities like a $25 billion war of choice in Iran. And sately, photo ops with Kid Rock ahead of improving the lives of our troops and their families. It's deeply troubling to me that the department received a historic $1 trillion last year, including 9 billion under HR1 for improving troops quality of life.
▶ 4:58:53But the New Mexican service members that I have and I have talked to are still living in barracks that are at capacity, sending their kids to run down schools and lack access to on-base child care. Here's an example. During my most recent visit to White Sands Missile Range, I saw severely aging onbase infrastructure, specifically an elementary school that is in need of a complete rebuild. Secretary Hegsath, last fall you said that quality of life for our warriors is a critical component of reviving the warrior ethos.
▶ 4:59:23In a video you posted to social media last November, you said that the places where our war fighters reside need to be safe, comfortable, and clean. And in your opening statement today, you said quality of life is front and center in this budget. But when it comes to our troops quality of life, I fear that this is more of all talk because I can tell you the outdated barracks that I saw at Whit Sands Missile Range were anything but safe, comfortable, clean, and I haven't heard from service members about any improvements since you've assumed this role.
▶ 4:59:53As Secretary of Defense, do you take any accountability for the continued quality of life concerns that New Mexico's military service members and family face today under your Well, I I appreciate your uh attention to the matter of quality of life, which is incredibly important to us, and it's reflected in this budget. I mean, historic amounts in barracks, in family housing, in uh family support like child development, youth program.
▶ 5:00:17I mean, this budget surpasses anything you've seen from this department uh in quite some time to include replacing or eliminating all poor and failing barracks. So, we've seen those photos. We responded to them with a barracks task force with a billion dollars initially and now we have billions of dollars behind it to make sure they're safe and clean uh and quality, but also that where they need to be replaced, they're rebuilt and replaced. And the president has charged me with doing that and we're focused on doing that.
▶ 5:00:42Thank you, Secretary. And I hope that the next photos that you receive and the next photos that I receive and reports that I receive are of improved conditions and of new barracks and of quality of life improvements because this has gone on for far too long. Uh let me give you another example. at Halman Air Force Base, the child development centers on base faced critical staffing issues for many years and uh just recently gave military families, our airmen and women just nine days to find new child care providers.
▶ 5:01:07One parent said she felt she had no choice but to resign from her job as a physician assistant when her son lost his spot in on-based care. And one patient describing his experience seeking healthcare at Canon Air Force Base said, "Good luck. If you need specialized care, referrals take six months or more, and regular appointments are booking a month out. And so spending a billion dollars a day on a war overseas while leaving our service members out to drive is not America first. It's a betrayal.
▶ 5:01:35Secretary Hegth, I voted for $1 trillion for the defense budget in committee last year, and I've yet to see the results come home. Service members back home have said nothing about progress or improvements underway. within 30 days. Secretary, would you commit to sending me a detailed list of every dollar that is going to improve the quality of life at bases in my district? We will get you whatever we can, but that doesn't meet with what we've seen, which is running as fast as this department ever has on quality of life issues because I've been in their shoes.
▶ 5:02:04I've seen those barracks and I've seen them recently. And uh it may not have happened under this administration, but this administration's going to fix it. Uh and ultimately, this budget reflects that kind of priority across
▶ 5:02:14Well, thank you, Secretary. And I will just suggest that it needs to run faster. It needs to run at the speed of light. It needs to cross time travel. I don't care what it takes, but it's gone on for far too long. And so I appreciate your attention to this issue, but we have got to get it done. And we cannot be here again next year discussing the improvements that haven't been done despite what's in the budget today. And so let me be clear that these issues have persisted for years under both administrations on both sides of the aisle.
▶ 5:02:38The department has received billions of taxpayer dollars as this committee has continued to work in a bipartisan fashion to support our troops and their families. And at a time when cost of living is the top issue for families, including those who serve, the department is in the in the position to address these costs of housing, child care, groceries, and other needs. I hope the department chooses to do that. Thank you, chairman. I yield back.
▶ 5:03:00Gentleman yields back. Chair now recognized gentleman from Texas, Mr.
▶ 5:03:03Thank you, Mr. chairman and thank you secretary for being here and the work you're doing. Over the past decade, Bitcoin has evolved from a fringe asset into a matter of national security. Iran has demanded Bitcoin as a toll for transit through the straight of Hormuz. North Korean cyber actors have leveraged it in ransomware campaigns and China is believed to be stockpiling substantial holdings as part of a strategic reserve.
▶ 5:03:27Just last week, Indopaccom Commander Admiral Paparo stated that Bitcoin has direct implications for power projection and he noted that Indopaccom is operating a node on the Bitcoin network and furtherance of that mission. Secretary, do you share the opinion that Bitcoin is a tool to project power and are there any departmentwide initiatives to ensure the US secures a strategic advantage in Bitcoin and combats China's digital authoritarianism?
▶ 5:03:53Um, I guess my short answer would be yes and yes. long an enthusiast of of Bitcoin and crypto potential and a lot of the things we're doing enabling it or defeating it uh is are classified efforts that are ongoing inside our department which I do provide do provide us a lot of leverage in a lot of different scenarios.
▶ 5:04:10I appreciate that and I I share your views. I thank you for that. Uh I also wanted an update uh with our operations in Qatar. How are those going uh since the Iran war and how have cutter been as a partner to work with over these last few months? Uh I think it's fair to say that the Gulf states to include uh Qatar have uh done a nice job integrating on air defenses specifically and then providing access bases basing and overflight. Um Qatar being one of them. UAE Saudi, Kuwait, Bahrain.
▶ 5:04:40Um they've they've lived the threat of Iran. Um there's some complicated aspects with Qatar. Uh but ultimately they've they've provided support to what we need in the theater.
▶ 5:04:49I appreciate that. I uh also appreciate the job that that our men and women are doing there at that base. I I realize uh they're going through a lot. We really appreciate the work you do and I'll yield back to you, Mr. Chairman.
▶ 5:05:01Uh chair, I recognize a gentle lady from New Hampshire, Miss Goodlander.
▶ 5:05:06I want to thank our witnesses for being here today and I want to begin u by getting right to it since my time is limited on this $ 1.5 trillion budget request. Mr. Heath, you testified last year and you testified again today uh that you will be accountable for every American taxpayer dollar that comes to the department where it goes and why.
▶ 5:05:31Uh that's really important since as it's been pointed out the department has failed eight audits. Uh the department remains on GAO's high-risisk list. The inspector general just last year alone identified billions of dollars that could have been put to better use and in questioned costs that is spending that raised red flags.
▶ 5:05:55Uh so this is this is a crisis right now in accountability of where the dollars of the American taxpayers who are in the middle of a cost crisis where this money is going. I want us I want to ask about your war in Iran and Mr. Mr. Hurst, you testified earlier today that $25 billion has been spent to date. I just want to clarify that that is money that taxpayer dollars that have been spent already in this
▶ 5:06:25$25 reflects the costs of the war, right? So, we've already spent the dollars on munitions and things like that. So, we're factoring in cost of munitions expended in that total.
▶ 5:06:33So, how much of that has gone towards munitions? Does that include the munitions that have been spent to date? Yeah, that reflects the munitions that have been spent to date and other operational costs.
▶ 5:06:46can you give us a breakdown of those costs are?
▶ 5:06:50Uh, we'll work to get you guys a product that has a detailed breakdown of those
▶ 5:06:53Yeah, my concern here is Mr. Hegsith, you've testified repeatedly that you're going to be accountable for each and every American taxpayer dollar that you spend, that you're going to be accountable for the rationale. Here we are 60 days in to your war of choice in Iran and you can't give us an answer on a breakdown of the basic breakdown of American taxpayer dollars that have been spent in your war of choice. That's a question for Mr. Hurst. You right now as you sit here now, you can
▶ 5:07:20we're happy to give you a breakdown. We'll provide you a product after this hearing. Well, I I would love for you to give us this breakdown now and explain to us, was this unbudgeted costs or was this something the department planned for in advance since you were appropriated $1 trillion last year?
▶ 5:07:36The department deals with contingency operations all the time within its normal budget.
▶ 5:07:40So, this was not budgeted for my my point here is, you know, and and General Kane, you've testified to this. We all understand for you to do your jobs, you need Congress to pass budgets. For us to do our jobs, we need you to give us the details and to to be accountable to American taxpayers. And so I got to say it's it's it's an extraordinary dereliction that as you sit here, you cannot account for billions of dollars that have already been spent.
▶ 5:08:10You're briefed on munitions every week. You and your entire staff have every just so the American public know it's not as if you don't have munitions levels do from us every single week. So you know exactly the numbers you're talking about you have testified that American taxpayers need to know where their dollars are going and as you sit here today you can't provide us with a basic answer to the most simple question that you should be able to answer to each and every American.
▶ 5:08:33You're asking a question to an answer with an answer you already have. No, I'm asking you for a breakdown where you said you will be accountable for every taxpayer dollar. You cannot tell us were any of billion dollars in taxpayer funds that have gone to fund your war of choice in Iran. And I look forward to getting details from our witnesses after this hearing because the American taxpayers need to know. Mr. Hexith, can I ask you, do you know what what the average cost of a gallon of gas was in this country on on February 28th?
▶ 5:09:04Well, it depends on where you live. If you live in California, it's eight Do you know what the average cost of a gallon of gas is today?
▶ 5:09:13Much higher in California.
▶ 5:09:14$423. I got to say, Mr. Heg Seth, you said you've got a crack economic team that's looking at the impacts of this war on the American taxpayer and you can't answer this basic question. Uh, that should shock the conscience of every American. M. General Kaine, I want to come back to something, a really important principle, and my time is limited. You testified to an important and bedrock principle of American law that our service members follow lawful orders and lawful orders only. Is that right?
▶ 5:09:44Do you agree with the statement, quote, "The military won't follow unlawful orders."
▶ 5:09:49I do.
▶ 5:09:51Mr. Hegath, do you agree with that
▶ 5:09:54I do, but understand what you're insinuating in a partisan point. I I'm not I'm actually quoting you directly, Mr. Hegsth, from April 12th, 2016. And I appreciate that on the record, you've clarified this important principle of
▶ 5:10:06Gentle Times expired here. And I recognize a gentleman from North Carolina, Mr. Herrian.
▶ 5:10:10Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and uh thank you, Mr. Secretary, and Chairman Kaine. It's always a pleasure to have you here. Uh I'm going to fall in line with the chairman's earlier statements that we can do whatever we want with our five minutes. And I'm going to give you all a brief a break from uh the conflict here. And I'm going to tell you a story and it's a story that's important to me. And I'm going to start with a proposed citation. And it's a rare point of personal privilege for me to do this, but I have an ask of you.
▶ 5:10:39But I'm going to start with a proposed citation for a Medal of Honor award upgrade from a Silver Star. Sergeant First Class Thomas J. Grasso distinguished himself by acts of gallantry and intrepidity above and beyond the call of duty between September 29th, 2015 and October 4th, 2015 while serving as a senior communications sergeant operational detachment alpha 3133 advanced operations base north special operations task force Afghanistan in support of opera operation resolute
▶ 5:11:09support. Sergeant Firstclass Graasso was part of a small special forces element that seized Kundus, a provincial capital of over 300,000 civilians from the Taliban. Outnumbered 60 to1, the US special forces element faced an overwhelming enemy force of 2,000 confirmed Taliban fighters. On September 29th, facing a Taliban advance on Kundus airfield, Sergeant Firstclass Grasso established a sniper overwatch position in the air traffic control tower.
▶ 5:11:36With enemy fire converging from three directions, Sergeant Firstclass Grasso risked his life to engage a hostile anti-aircraft team, successfully clearing the way for air support. On September 30th, fighting through relentless ambushes on their subsequent movement into the city, Sergeant Firstclass Grasso repeatedly dismounted his vehicle while exposed to intense enemy fire to engage insurgents and shield the convoy.
▶ 5:11:59During one encounter while under withering enemy fire, he disregarded his own safety, maneuvered into the kill zone of a complex near ambush, saving the lives of five trapped special forces teammates, one Romanian partner and their interpreter. Sergeant Firstclass Grasso again came under heavy machine gun fire when he dismounted to direct the element to the city compound. To enable the remaining element to safely enter the compound, he effectively returned fire and suppressed the enemy positions.
▶ 5:12:25From October 1st through 4th, Sergeant Firstclass Grasso anchored the defense of the compound, absorbing the heaviest concentration of enemy fire. He repeatedly subjected himself to heavy machine gun and rocket propelled grenade fire from distances as close as 15 meters, repelling dozens of enemy attacks. On October 1st, a rocket propelled grenade directly hit his position, inflicting a traumatic brain injury. Bleeding, disoriented, and going 60 hours without sleep, he checked on his teammates before returning to his exposed post.
▶ 5:12:56From there, he single-handedly neutralized continuous waves of attackers, attempting to detonate vehicle-born IEDs, forcing the enemy to request a temporary ceasefire. During a subsequent rocket propelled grenade attack near his position, he eliminated a follow-on explosive filled rickshaw, preventing a perimeter breach. As the fight wore on, the enemy began throwing hand grenades into the compound from an adjacent building.
▶ 5:13:19Sergeant Firstclass Grasso ran through the blast to hurl grenades back, then established a clear line of sight from an exposed staircase to enable his command to call in a danger close F-16 strafing run. Bullets hitting 15 meters from his position. When partner forces were decisively engaged without sufficient ammunition outside the perimeter, he maneuvered without regard for his own safety under devastating fire to resupply their position and employed accurate sniper fire, destroying another advance.
▶ 5:13:46On October 4th, he unhesitatingly stepped into the enemy's line of sight to destroy the fighter preparing to fire a rocket propelled grenade at two trapped teammates. Throughout 130 hours of grueling, sleepless combat, Sergeant Firstclass Graaso's extraordinary heroism, unwavering dedication to his teammates and complete disregard for his own life ensured the recapture of Kundus with zero friendly personnel killed in action.
▶ 5:14:11As these severe conditions took a toll on the element, his ability to fight through a traumatic brain injury with indomitable will and lethal precision inspired those around him. Sergeant Firstclass Thomas J. Grasso's herois heroism and selflessness are in keeping with the highest traditions of military service and reflect great credit upon himself his unit in the United States Army.
▶ 5:14:32I'm asking you to direct the board chair of HRC awards and decorations branch to board Sergeant Firstclass Thomas J. Graasso's packet. I know these things to be true inside of this packet because I was there.
▶ 5:14:54And I'm here today only because I was one of those five that he rescued out of that near complex ambush and I'm grateful for your service to our
▶ 5:15:07Congressman, thank you.
▶ 5:15:08Um we'll do it and I'd love to meet the sergeant first class.
▶ 5:15:11Thank you.
▶ 5:15:12I think gentleman yields. Um the chair now recognize a gentle lady from Maryland, Miss Elf.
▶ 5:15:17Thank you, Mr. Chair, I want to start by thanking CK Isam and General Keane for inviting a number of us to the Pentagon uh last week to talk about the 1.8 million enlisted service members we have, the challenges and opportunities that we can work together. Every base that I go to internationally and every single major military base in Maryland over the last year, I insist on meeting with service members and hearing um hearing what we can all do better. Mr. Secretary, I want to assure you I insist on those meetings. There's a whole lot we could talk about today. War in Iran.
▶ 5:15:45And I I too want to thank the families of the 14 service members we have lost uh in this war so far. Both strikes in the Caribbean and the East Pacific, firing of a number of people we all respect on this DASP on both sides 61 days into this war. But I want to start with those quality of life issues. Mr. Secretary, um a number of members of this committee met with uh survivors of sexual assault at Fort Hood, enlisted members and family members.
▶ 5:16:09Um, you sat here last year and you said, quote, "I applaud Congress for the efforts that have been ongoing to address sexual assaults, which we ha we do need to drive down to zero. That funding has not been reduced." I appreciate that, but the budget we have before us is level funded from last year, which you would agree is a realized cut year-over-year. So, I want to give you the opportunity to talk about how you're still going to drive those sexual assault numbers down to zero via flat funding.
▶ 5:16:36I'm told we've we've added 5%. So, it's actually not flat, but uh we remain committed to that. And I think you've seen throughout the force uh reductions, not enough. We want more. We want to go to zero, but we remain committed to
▶ 5:16:48We're going to hold you account accountable for that. Thank you. I want to move on to Ukraine. Um I don't normally agree with Mitch McConnell, but uh as you know, the department is withholding approximately 400 million in appropriated security assistance to Ukraine. Despite some public belittling, Ukraine has stepped up perhaps more than any other ally uh for us in the Middle East. They're harnessing the superiority that they have generated from a hard-fought war with Russia. They are intercepting Iranian drones that threaten US and partner forces in the Middle East. Uh but Mr.
▶ 5:17:18Secretary, I'm I'm very concerned about that 400 million. Can you please let this committee know, folks watching at home, the Ukrainian people, when they can expect that 400 million in Ukraine support passed by Congress bipartisanly last year to be released and put on contract for its congressionally intended purpose, the defense of
▶ 5:17:38So the department recognizes that 400 million was uh was allocated for European capacity building and as of yesterday it has been released
▶ 5:17:46as it released an under contract released as of yesterday. How would you describe it, Jay?
▶ 5:17:52Not under contract, but released to be put under contract.
▶ 5:17:56Let me let me ask you a different way, Mr. Hurst. When will it actually be on the ground in Ukraine?
▶ 5:18:02That depends on what they buy with the money. And we're going to take the advice of the Yukcom commanders who employ those funds for best use.
▶ 5:18:09Okay, we're going to we're going to keep on that because it's it's incredibly important as we heard from from everybody, including the King of England yesterday. Um I'm going to stay on our allies here. It's clear that the president didn't account for this trade of humans being closed. Global market, oil market disruption, gas prices skyrocketing. Mr. Secretary, gas in my district, Maryland, not California, The president did not notify allies uh abroad or Congress before he went to war.
▶ 5:18:37He has repeatedly bered and belittled our NATO allies. And I am not interested in Twitter diplomacy. I'm interested in our actual exit strategy from this war. So, I'm actually going to pose it to General Kane if I could.
▶ 5:18:49The president did understand the risks and had the courage to undertake the endeavor nonetheless, which the American people voted for that kind of courage and taken on that Iranian nuclear
▶ 5:18:59General Kane, uh, have you or what have you formally and specifically requested of our NATO allies and European partners for operations in the strait? Can you tell me escort duties, air defense, peace enforcement, specific requests of our NATO allies?
▶ 5:19:14uh both US and state have reached out through a variety of of mechanisms to pulse our international partners not just in Europe but in the Pacific as well to see what capabilities could be brought to bear down there as this is largely um you know this is largely a uh uh we don't move much trade through there I'll defer to energy commerce and treasury to
▶ 5:19:41but we've been specific with our allies about what we We have
▶ 5:19:44Okay. Can I ask you for specificity on another issue that's been brought up today from a military perspective, not a policy perspective? What will it require of our service members to actually eradicate any Iranian nuclear threat? Can you help us understand that?
▶ 5:19:58Uh there there's such a wide range, ma'am, of options in there, all of which are classified. it would be out of my swim lane. But we always deliver the full range of options, the associated risk and the advice to go do the things that we would be asked to do there. There's uh uh many
▶ 5:20:18I can't speak for everybody on this committee, but I know we would like
▶ 5:20:20gentleoman's time has expired. The the chair now recognizes Mr. Mesmer from Indiana for five minutes.
▶ 5:20:25Thank you, Chairman, and thank you, Secretary Hegsth, General Kaine, and Comprollers for being here today. Congratulations to all of you for rolling out the $ 1.5 trillion defense budget. I'd like to offer special thanks to Mr. Hurst and his comproller team for the work that it takes to put put it this budget together. It's a monumental task for and and important for our nation and our well-being. Secretary Hexath, as you know, the theme of this year's NDAA is expanding the defense industrial base and one of the key bottlenecks to that expansion is our workforce size.
▶ 5:20:54We are not producing enough skilled young workers and and too many regions with strong manufacturing potential remain underutilized. Would you support Congress working across committees on a national defense strategy? Workforce, a workforce strategy that promotes technical training, apprenticeships, and proven schoolto-industry pipelines.
▶ 5:21:14Absolutely. I think you'll find our budget fully aligned with the theme of the NDAA and when it comes to skilled workers, whether it's DODIA schools, DOIA schools, whether it's the Patriot Pipeline or any form of trades, we're investing in that because we need those folks invested in our industrial base.
▶ 5:21:29Excellent. I'd look forward to working uh you working with my team to ensure those efforts align with the department defense the indust industrial workforce workforce priorities. So my my office will be reaching out also. Secretary Hexth, we are in a ship building crisis as the department implements President Trump's vision for a larger fleet.
▶ 5:21:48Should the Navy leverage a model of distributed modular ship building that taps industrial strength in outside of traditional shipyards such as uh in the Midwest in the Great Lakes and Ohio and Mississippi Valley regions to help expand capacity to ease pressure on overburdened shipyards and cut down on maintenance backlogs.
▶ 5:22:07Um in in short, yes. and including international options where we can work with partners who have specific capabilities that would speed up the timeline on shipyards that are that are behind uh in our own country. But you'll find $65 billion in this budget on ship building. A lot of which builds on those types of capabilities.
▶ 5:22:24Excellent. Uh would you also agree that plat platforms like unmanned surface vessels, tenders, and other support ships seem well suited for production outside traditional shipyards?
▶ 5:22:35Absolutely. And in fact, some of those facilities were precisely the ones we visited on the Arsenal of Freedom tour. USVS, UUVs, where you don't need the same capabilities you would in a traditional shipyard or you can invest in a new type of shipyard spec specifically tailored to those more bespoke capabilities that can be scaled for the fight of the future. For sure. Perfect. Thank you, Secretary Hexath and General Kaine.
▶ 5:22:58Uh many from the department have reiterated support for the nuclear sea launched cruise missile and I believe President Trump needs more support options in in the form of expanded theater nuclear capability. Uh from your perspective what specific deterrence problem does slick amend solve that current capabilities do not and what risk do we assume if if that capability is not fielded?
▶ 5:23:20Take it first. uh slick amen provides it's part of the multiple layers of nuclear deterrent that we that any president has to have at their disposal that creates dilemmas for enemies who are either nuclear capable or not and ensures the kind of leverage required and defense uh required deterrence required that the nation that sort of underwrites everything we do. So more options on that that the adversary can't account for is only good for us.
▶ 5:23:48Only thing I'll add is uh as we mentioned a little bit earlier sir we continue to modernize the the full range of the triad. This is another tool in that regional normally. So it's a it's something I support.
▶ 5:24:02Thank you. As we look beyond the current program, should the department be thinking about a future seal launch nuclear system with greater survivability, maneuverability, and potential hypersonic capability?
▶ 5:24:14Uh yes and and I know we are. Okay, thank you. Um, Secretary Hegsth and General Kaine, one of the major bottlenecks in expanding the defense industrial base is uh, uh, test range access. Companies are waiting too long for range time and that slows fielding at speed modern conflict demands. What is the department doing to expand and modernize the testing
▶ 5:24:40Um, $5.2 billion worth of investment. But I'll tell you when we sit with industry and I I I simply ask the question, what can we do for you? How do we empower you? Test ranges come up almost every single time and the limits and the timeline limits they create. So we're trying to blow that open and create a lot more options for them.
▶ 5:24:58Thank you. Uh Secretary Heath and General Kaine, I'd like to extend an invitation for both of you to come and visit Naval Surface Warship Center Crane and see what a great great work is being done in Southwest Indiana to support the war fighter and ensure our military edge. And with that, I'll close and and surrender the rest of my time.
▶ 5:25:16The chair now recognizes Mr. Whitesides from California for five minutes.
▶ 5:25:20Thank you, Chairman, Chairwoman. Um, Secretary Hath, General Kane, Mr. Hurst, thank you for testifying today uh and for your service to the nation. Over the past few weeks, military and civilian leaders of many of the DoD components have testified about their FY27 posture. We appreciate their professionalism and their service to the country and the time that they've spent to uh testify before us. I want to start with Mr. Hurst. Mr. Hurst, you testified at the beginning of this that you said that the estimated cost of the war is about $25 billion.
▶ 5:25:49In March, you stated that the first week of the war cost 11 billion. Uh so is it right to say that the following seven weeks have cost about $14 billion total or two billion per
▶ 5:26:02Yeah. The most intense phase of the conflict was obviously the beginning. That's when most munitions were used.
▶ 5:26:06And that's the biggest expense from the
▶ 5:26:08Right. So, so that you and you also said just now that the $25 billion includes the cost of the munitions deployed. Is that right? This question is for the CFO, sir. Yeah,
▶ 5:26:18that's correct.
▶ 5:26:19Okay. So, I I guess I'm confused then. It makes sense that if that's the cost, then the cost to refill those stocks would be no more than $25 billion. Am I right about that?
▶ 5:26:30When we estimate cost of the conflict, we're using current replacement cost for these weapon systems.
▶ 5:26:34Right. You're using current replacement cost. So, it's frankly pretty surprising that the estimate for the supplemental would be $200 billion. You don't if you'd like to explain that you can, but
▶ 5:26:45but that's not that's not accurate. We don't have an estimate for the cost of
▶ 5:26:48Okay, that's what's publicly reported. So, it's good to hear that it's going to be less. Um, Mr. Hurst, do you have signal on your phone?
▶ 5:26:57I'm sorry. Why is this relevant?
▶ 5:26:58Do you have signal on your phone?
▶ 5:27:00What does this have to do with the
▶ 5:27:02I'm going to take that as a yes. Um, Mr. Kane. Sorry, General Kane. Do you have Signal on your phone?
▶ 5:27:09I do, sir. Yes.
▶ 5:27:11Okay. So, I want to talk about Signal. Last year, the secretary and other administration officials discussed sensitive and almost certainly classified information about a strike in Yemen using the unclassified Signal app. Mr. Hurst, what's the current policy for Signal on official DoD devices?
▶ 5:27:27I'm the comproller. I don't do CIO work.
▶ 5:27:30So, therefore, it is uh allowed. Is that your statement that it is now allowed to have signal on your
▶ 5:27:37Mr. Whites? My statement is I run the budget for DoD.
▶ 5:27:41Yeah. Okay. Well, he's got it on his phone, so therefore it must be
▶ 5:27:44Toronto, I got to go back and look if it's on my official phone. I was talking about my personal phone. I'm not exactly sure. I'll go back and look, though.
▶ 5:27:51Okay. Um, last month, FBI Director Cash Patel made a public announcement that Russian hackers are targeting Signal App users in the government. specifically stated that they were targeting individuals of high intelligence value including current and former US government officials. Um I hope that it is not official policy that you can have signal on your official phones and I would love to get a response from uh the department on that. We have now asked this question about five separate times and have never gotten a straight answer.
▶ 5:28:21Um I want to close by talking about uh helicopters. Mr. Secretary. Um, I want to ask about the Army Apache helicopter that flew over Kid Rock's property on March 28th. Uh, an investigation was launched by the 101st Combat Aviation Brigade Command leadership. But before that review is completed on March 31st, you terminated it via social media post. Did you personally direct termination of that review?
▶ 5:28:46Uh, I did.
▶ 5:28:47Okay. Now, the the president said they probably shouldn't have been doing it and that I'd take a look at it. So, did you talk to the president before terminating that review?
▶ 5:28:57Well, I I don't uh relay what I talk about with
▶ 5:29:00Okay. I think unfortunately that means that you did talk to him, which in turn means that you've just confirmed that the president himself overruled the leadership of the 101st Airborne. Mr. Secretary, you yourself have affirmed repeatedly the need for higher standards and higher accountability at every level of your agency. Commanders rely on established processes to uphold these standards. How does cancelling a command initiated review by the 101st Airborne leadership support a culture of accountability? Actually, I think I'll ask that of the chairman.
▶ 5:29:28Sir, um, back to my earlier comments about the importance in my role of staying in the middle. Um, what you're alluding to is in my assessment with deep respect for your ask is a partisan question and I think it would be inappropriate for me to answer that.
▶ 5:29:43Mr. Sir, I actually don't think it is. I think it is actually a ve fundamental principle of accountability in our department and and I think it was the wrong decision. I'm going to close by just saying one thing. Mr. Secretary, you started this hearing by politicizing it and I want to make one point. Poll after poll shows that the American public does not support this war and support is dropping every day. We are all representing our constituents. our constituents, which is our constitutional duty.
▶ 5:30:09And to state that we are politicizing it is an affront to Congress and every member in this house, and I yield back.
▶ 5:30:18You are politicizing it, Congressman.
▶ 5:30:20The gentleman's time is expired. The chair now recognizes Mr. Schmidt from Kansas for 5 minutes.
▶ 5:30:26Thank you, Madam Chair, and I want to thank all three of our witnesses for being here today and answering our questions. Uh, Mr. Secretary, let me start with you. U, a little bit off topic for today, but relevant. We are now more than 2 months into the funding shutdown for the Department of Homeland Security because folks at this end of the avenue have not yet been able to get to yes. I hope we're going to get to yes here shortly. I think we made some progress here today while we've been in this gathering.
▶ 5:30:51Uh it's been necessary, as I understand it, for the administration to scrape out the pennies under the couch cushions in order to keep DHS running and and honestly running uh uh not at full speed. Has your department had any uh role in contributing to the ongoing operations of DHS while things have not been funded?
▶ 5:31:11Well, I wouldn't comment on the status of of DHS. I'll just say the ways that we cooperate with them have continued. I mean, look at the southern look at the southern border and the 11,000 troops we have there, task force southern border, ensuring that our border is locked down. Uh we've worked with law enforcement from day one on DHS to do that just like we have with local law enforcement across the country. So, uh, obviously we welcome DHS funding, but in the meantime, we're going to protect the country, protect the homeland, uh, and that's what we're doing with them.
▶ 5:31:37Do what is necessary.
▶ 5:31:39Very good. Uh, General, let me ask you, uh, if it is more appropriate for the secretary, we'll defer, but um, we we, you know, we've obviously been following with interest uh, all of the developments and the publicly reported developments in Operation Epic Fury. There was some public reported publicly reported activity a while back that I had reason to think might involve some Kansas service personnel. We didn't know from the public reporting. Uh we had simply been trying to find out uh whether our folks were involved or not. We finally did get an answer.
▶ 5:32:08It took about four weeks and when we got it uh it was for the most part everything we read in the press with one exception. One exception. I it's a bit unsatisfactory uh when we're just trying to do our job and figure out uh whether our folks are implicated and whether we need to be doing something to help them, their families or their folks back home. Uh I know you take seriously the importance of providing that information, but can you just offer some reassurance that you do take those inquiries seriously and that that was perhaps not
▶ 5:32:35We do, sir. I'm not exactly sure the situation you're talking about, but I'll get the teams together and and figure out uh what broke down there and fix it. appreciate it very very much.
▶ 5:32:45Mr. Secretary, let me come back to you. Um in talking with uh canons who either have been deployed or in support of folks who have been deployed um I am under the impression that there has been a particularly high especially early in the operation prior to the ceasefire particularly high uh amount of of concussive activity and that we might be well advised to be prepared when folks come home for uh concussive injuries uh for combat related PTSD perhaps at levels we we aren't expecting at least those of us
▶ 5:33:15watching from the outside of the operation. Uh can you say anything either about that in particular or more generally about what types of uh health and postcombat related uh health issues we ought to be preparing for when folks come home from this operation in
▶ 5:33:31Well, I know Congressman all of that is tracked very closely uh as it pertains to this budget. There's $70 million for more research on that. Uh but I would note that as it's tracked and identified also 90% of those with injuries in this conflict have returned to duty. Uh so but that doesn't mean there couldn't still be a lingering effect which is is noted uh and will be continued to be tracked throughout.
▶ 5:33:53And can I follow on that? I appreciate that answer very much. With respect particularly to guard personnel who have been deployed and may when they come back they return to their civilian roles. They may be in communities far from a military post. Uh they may be in communities that don't have dedicated health care services that may be particularly focused on uh concussive damage or um u post-traumatic stress damage. Uh, is there particular thought on things we ought to be doing to prepare to serve that population when those men and women come home?
▶ 5:34:21I think the the biggest one is identifying it up front, doing that testing upfront to identify what has occurred and then the ability to track those service members. I know as a frontline leader that became part of my responsibility as well, tracking those who may be more susceptible to it, whether they have a formal network to address it or not. So, uh, definitely something we care about. tryare ensuring they have increased access in places where there aren't military facilities is an important part of it.
▶ 5:34:44Thank you, Mr. Secretary. We care as well. We want to be helpful in that front when our folks come home. Last question uh particular to to uh some folks in Kansas. When you were here last year, Mr. Secretary, I talked about uh cooperation between the the Veterans Health Agency and DHA and some work we've been trying to do at Urban Army Community Hospital at Fort Riley. this committee and the congress and the president uh enacted into law a provision that causes some cooperation between the two to happen and we are very excited to report are looking very good out at Irwin.
▶ 5:35:15Um the reason I raised this with you today some of the folks who made that happen were the commanding general at the first infantry general ran who's about to deploy to uh Europe I believe in early June. He has chief medical officer who's about to leave for a different assignment. Can we get those things signed before they leave? The chair now recognizes Mr. Tran from California for five minutes.
▶ 5:35:38Thank you so much, Chairwoman. Thank you, uh, Secretary Hegth, General Kaine, Mr. Hurst for being here today. You know, after I was honorably discharged from the Army Reserve, the GI Bill helped me go to school and ultimately become a lawyer. My focus was representing clients who were wrongfully terminated or face discrimination and harassment at the work. Mr. Secretary, if I were in the courtroom trying to prove that you discriminate against our military heroes, I wouldn't have to look very far or very hard.
▶ 5:36:07In just 16 months, you have fired more than a dozen senior military leaders. You've delayed or cancelled the promotion of even more. Your chief of staff told the secretary of the army that President Trump would not want to stand.
▶ 5:36:22That's not true. That was totally false reporting question yet, Mr. Secretary. Yeah, he he told the president, sorry, the secretary of the army that the president would not want to stand next to a black female officer at the military events. But, you know, despite all of this, I remain very hopeful that you can and will do better for the men and women who have dedicated their lives to protect our great country.
▶ 5:36:51You're here to ask for $1.5 trillion. That's a huge budget and I want to make sure that you have the ability to manage it. Secretary Hegsth, you would agree with me when I say that we want the most qualified people in every position of our military. Correct. That's a question.
▶ 5:37:10Yes. Thank you. General Kaine, you would want the same.
▶ 5:37:17Thank you. You know, I share the bipartisan concern uh about firing the firing of General George. And what I and the American people want to know from you is did you ask the president for his permission before you fired General George? Secretary Hath.
▶ 5:37:34Um it is my responsibility to confer with the commander-in-chief on especially high level personnel matters and ultimately I won't relay what was discussed but uh he was aware of the action that would be taken.
▶ 5:37:44Okay, great. Thank you for that. And when you made the decision to fire General George, did you consult Secretary Driscoll?
▶ 5:37:53There had been multiple uh consultations over over a year. Yes.
▶ 5:37:57Do you and do you and Secretary Driscoll have a good working relationship?
▶ 5:38:02Yes. I appreciate the work he's doing for the Army.
▶ 5:38:05And for the record, would you agree that Secretary Driscoll is doing a great job as the Secretary of the Army? I appreciate the work that the secretary is doing and uh made the personnel ch change based on the chief of the army.
▶ 5:38:17In fact, he was so good that at his job that the president sent him to Ukraine to negotiate a peace deal. Um do you know why the president chose to send him over you?
▶ 5:38:27Um I'm I'm grateful that the president puts in players at key moments to advance policy priorities and and that's what occurred there and I was very supportive of it at the time. Recently, Secretary Driscoll testified in front of the appropriations committee that he refused to strike the names of two female and two black officers from a promotion list due to their exemplary service names which were ultimately removed. Did you order him to strike those names?
▶ 5:38:52I know uh we removed those names. I did. Because we review every general officer. You mentioned 12 general officers have been reviewed. The number is much higher than that. I would also note that under Barack Obama, 197 general officers were removed. So this is not something uh specific to this administration. All every officer serves at the pleasure of the president and when they need to be removed in order to ensure we have the right leadership in those services.
▶ 5:39:21I will make those calls regardless of what you might say from the day. You
▶ 5:39:24know, about a year ago, the army began their transform uh transformation initiative. Uh, I'm all for modernization, but this process seems to have been completely rushed in a way that compromises our readiness, including deactivating a medical evacuation Blackhawk unit at Joint Training Forces Base, Los Alamos. I've heard recently from senior army officials who support slowing down the army transformation initiative, specifically as it relates to aviation.
▶ 5:39:51Secretary Hegv, can you commit to slowing down ATI as it relates to There are multiple places inside ATI that we are reviewing to ensure that we do not create capability gaps inside today's army based on the fights we have today and the fights of the future. And this budget reflects ensuring that we don't have any operational gaps uh in the army or any of the services.
▶ 5:40:14Mr. Secretary, during your opening, you brought up this beautiful slide and you talked about the arsenal of freedom. It's a Arsenal freedom slide talking about private investment, you know, from the $ 1.5 billion. Uh RTX was on there, Boeing, GE, L3, Harris, Lockheed. My question to you is, do you or your wife have any personal investment in those
▶ 5:40:37Thank you.
▶ 5:40:37The gentleman's time is expired. The chair now recognizes Mr. Crank from Colorado for five minutes.
▶ 5:40:42Thank you, uh, Madam Chair. Mr. Secretary, the department's FY27 military construction request includes plans for a new $250 million Space Force operations facility at Shrivever Space Force Base. When constructed, this facility will support essential national security missions like Golden Dome, the National Reconnaissance Office, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance missions, and other space command requirements.
▶ 5:41:08With a projected workforce that includes over 2600 high-paying civilian jobs, how will the department compete with the private sector to recruit and hire the highly skilled talent needed for those positions? And how will the department work with El Paso County, which is my county and and the city of Colorado Springs, who strongly supported this administration, by the way, to meet the growing needs of the Space Force.
▶ 5:41:33Well, first and foremost, and I mean this, I would welcome your input. That's usually what I say when I'm on on the road and in the field with commanders is, okay, you ask me, we we meet with battalion and brigade commanders all the time. They ask me a really detailed question and the first thing I say is, what do you think? And usually they know the problem set much better than us. And we take that feedback back to HQ and we action it. So I would welcome how we can ensure that that workforce is properly care cared for uh and competitive considering how important the space force is, which is doubled in this budget in size.
▶ 5:42:03That domain of warfare we have to get right. Yes. Okay. Uh, Mr. Secretary, sometimes uh here in Congress and on these committees, sometimes we do oversight, but sometimes we just overact, and there's been a little bit of that today. It's been some overacting. Um, I would hope that when I look back on my congressional career, I've only been here a little while, I do know that when President Biden uh did some military operations, I supported him.
▶ 5:42:30I wasn't here, but I supported those operations because it's important to support the men and women of the military and it's important to support our commander-in-chief when he makes the decision to deploy those troops. Um, and I'd hope that when I look back on my career years from now, I will say the same thing that I didn't choose what to support based on who the party was in the White House, but based on whether it was the best thing for our national security.
▶ 5:42:57And I hope that some of my colleagues who who don't seem to hold that same standard would introspectively look look at what what they do. But I want to give you a minute. There's been a lot said about Iran and about the mission in Iran and I think there's been a lot of misinformation here and I want to give you the opportunity to correct the Well, I appreciate that. Um, we are fortunate to have a president who understands the nature of the threat we face from a nuclear armed Iran. full stop.
▶ 5:43:27Uh we know what they say they would do. We know that they were pursuing and we know that at their weakest moment we had an opportunity to do something about it before they had a conventional shield of missiles and drones so large that they could never be contested. And then without inspections and from a bad deal they would race they could possibly race to a bomb. So the threat was right there in front of us. All it took was the courage to act which no other president had done.
▶ 5:43:50and he gave us a clear set of objectives with the chairman and I talked about from day one in pursuit of ensuring that Iran never gets a nuclear weapon. You degrade their missile program, defeat their missile program, get out their conventional navy and ensure they don't have a defense industrial base so they can rebuild those capabilities. That's what we briefed from the podium. That's what we talked about. That's what we were focused on. And in service of that had overwhelming military victories in pursuit of it. I we've never seen an air campaign like what we did alongside the Israeli Air Force.
▶ 5:44:20Not to mention the rescue of those two pilots and the professionalism of that joint force that went downtown twice. Once in the day and once in the night to leave no man behind. That is a call the commander-in-chief makes and he had the guts to make it. And as a result, we're in a ceasefire in the middle of negotiations in a very strong place with a blockade that will ensure that when this is done, when a deal is set, it's a deal on the president's terms to ensure Iran never gets a nuclear weapon. That's a fight worth having.
▶ 5:44:48And if the American people remember 47 years, Americans remember 47 years of what the Iranians have done to us, targeting and killing Americans. If they had a nuclear weapon, they would use it. This president is has unleashed his military to do something about it. We've had historic successes, and if we need to go at it again to ensure that success, we are prepared to, but we're hopeful over time that a deal will be compelled and compelled quickly.
▶ 5:45:12So this talk about endless wars or forever wars and president points out rightfully what this town tolerated in Iraq and Afghanistan and Vietnam that is not this this is a discrete mission to pursue US objectives and we're doing it in in a historic fashion. I support this president's operation right now in Iran. I supported uh President Obama when he said he opposed a nuclear Iran and would do what was necessary to to not to do that. And I I supported President Clinton when he did the same.
▶ 5:45:41It's time to act and I'm glad that this president did. Thank you.
▶ 5:45:45The chair now recognizes Mr. Vinman from Virginia for five minutes.
▶ 5:45:49Thank you. Um earlier, Secretary Hexath, you talked about flexible realism. So, let's uh see if we can figure out how much of it is realistic and how much of it is just flexible. Secretary Hath, last year I asked you some questions about Indopaccom and threats in Europe and you had a hard time answering those questions. I'm sure you prep better this year and I'm hoping you can answer some of these basic questions since now we are at war.
▶ 5:46:13Uh do you know what the price of oil is
▶ 5:46:17I don't know where it's gone as as of uh this time of this hearing, but roughly $100 a barrel.
▶ 5:46:22It's actually closer to 120 117.
▶ 5:46:24Well, it depends on the index you're looking at.
▶ 5:46:26I'm looking at uh Brent. Uh do you know what the price uh was the day before of Brent, the day before we went to war? Well, it was certainly lower. You understand you're taking some economic risk, but I would note a lot lower.
▶ 5:46:40The energy dominance this president has at least has put us in an incredible question. Thank you. So, is $72 and so now we have a 62% increase. Um, by the way, the department obviously will be paying those extra fuel costs. That's going to be not insignificant, but so will the American people. Now, at its narrowest point, uh, how wide is the straight of Hormuz? I think it's about 12 miles, but I'd have to check.
▶ 5:47:0724 miles, but 12 miles is actually the relevant number because that's the navigable channel.
▶ 5:47:11That's the International Water Navig channel point.
▶ 5:47:14And do you know how many o barrels of oil transited the straight of Hormuz each day before the war started?
▶ 5:47:20I don't know the exact number, but you're looking at over a hundred uh oil tankers usually transited a day or 120 a day would transport the straight.
▶ 5:47:28Yeah. And so 20 20 million barrels a day. And right now they're at a 81% reduction. So it sounds like you've done your homework. You you're you're tracking pretty well what the the strategic situation is. Um so a couple of questions.
▶ 5:47:46Um were you aware that if we struck Iran that it would they would most likely close the straight of Uh, of of course our department was prepared and planning for every possible contingency being front and center as a as something they may do in a desperate state to attempt to
▶ 5:48:04which is what they facilitate some kind of control
▶ 5:48:05and I appreciate that. And earlier you told Mr. Molton that this this department has looked at all uh aspects of the risk and that the president got every possible perspective and then recently you just said that the president did understand the risks and had the courage to undertake the endeavor nonetheless and that's leadership or words to that effect pretty close and so I just want to kind of give you the state of play right now it's been two months of war uh we have hopes for a resolution but the war continues
▶ 5:48:35really Iran has closed the straight and we've now gone in and blockaded their ports. 1ifth of uh the world's oil is unable to transit the straight and the American people and the department are paying um significantly more. And you also said that this is what the American people actually voted for.
▶ 5:48:57But actually um the American people voted for a promise not to get into Middle Eastern wars and they voted voted for lower lower prices and this is the exact opposite of what they got. So let me ask you this. Um the president ordered the strike. Is that correct?
▶ 5:49:17The president's been saying for over 30 years that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon. So he's been very clear as a position when their American people voted for President Trump. Overwhelmingly they voted for that position. But the president ordered the strike. Is that correct?
▶ 5:49:30Which strike are you referring to?
▶ 5:49:32The strike on Iran. The the war that we're in in
▶ 5:49:34Oh, of course. I mean, he's the commander-in-chief. He's made the call.
▶ 5:49:38It sounds like you're blaming daddy for the mess we're in. And I don't think he's going to be particularly happy with
▶ 5:49:43I see what you're trying to do. There's no daylight in this administration on this on this question. You've been standing shoulderto-shoulder with this
▶ 5:49:51We're claiming my time.
▶ 5:49:53So, let's shift gears. Last time we were here, I asked you if you'd apologize to the mother of an F-18 pilot whose son you endangered for sharing classified information on a signal chap. You refused. On March 1st, six Army soldiers, including a constituent of mine, were killed by an Iranian drone strike. Do you take any responsibility for those deaths?
▶ 5:50:14Um, I was there at Dover when they came back. Of course, I take responsibility for every aspect of
▶ 5:50:18I appreciate that because uh you also complain about the fact that tragic things happen on the news makes it front page news. The press only wants to make the president look bad. Is it about the soldiers or is it about the president looking bad?
▶ 5:50:33It's not just the president who wants the the media that wants to make him look bad. It's you.
▶ 5:50:37Um it's actually about the soldiers and it's frankly reprehensible that you would make that statement. And so, um, you know, Truman had a sign on his desk that said, "The buck stops here." And
▶ 5:50:48gentleman's time is expired. The chair now recognizes Mr. Van Norton from Wisconsin for five minutes.
▶ 5:50:54Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, Mr. Secretary, it's great to see you, General Kaine.
▶ 5:50:59Honorable Mr. Hurst, of course, my dear friend of over three decades, Master Chief is. How you doing? Um, hey, I I have to be very clear here. Um, I spent my entire adult life training for war, training others for war, or at war. And you very astutely mentioned to some of my Democrat colleagues that our generation has been involved, was involved in an endless war, a morass.
▶ 5:51:30And it I I've had with Matthew Burns, I've had 22 of my friends commit suicide. And I know that you have recently instituted a specific office to help lower active duty veterans suicide in conjunction with my great friend, Secretary Collins. So I want to thank you for that. Uh two months does not a morass make. However, it could be the start of one.
▶ 5:51:58Uh, and the difference between this administration and many previous administrations, I think that you understand particularly because of your background and your SCA back there and General Kaine, uh, you understand what it means to fight to win. And, and we didn't fight to win in Afghanistan. We didn't fight to win in Iraq. And it's palpable. I have more friends than I can count that are still on active duty in every branch of service, including the Coast Guard.
▶ 5:52:27And for a Navy guy, that's a big stretch. The morale of the men and women in the Department of War, in their case, the Department of Transportation, is exponentially higher than I've ever seen it ever. And that comes from leadership starting with President Trump going through you to General Kaine and through your sea. And what some of my colleagues refuse to admit is that that's how you win. It starts with the man. It's the first soft truth.
▶ 5:52:57Humans are more important than hardware. And I want to thank you for setting that environment. Um, I don't want to be at war, but Iran declared war on the United States of America 47 years ago. And those bastards are responsible for killing and maming many of my friends. So, this is not some esoteric political argument for me.
▶ 5:53:17This is a fact that President Trump by using you as the Secretary of War and General Kaine as CJCS and Master Fis what you're doing is you're going to end a war that was declared on us and I of all times when we should unite as Americans especially in this puzzle palace up here is when we're at war and it is a war of choice by the mullers that that is who chose to fight this war and we're going to end it.
▶ 5:53:49I don't really have a question for you. I trust your judgment, General Kane. I trust your judgment, Master Chief. I trust your judgment. And when you're coming here with with a request for a tremendous amount of money, um I understand that there's no fluff in there, that this is what's required to end this war that the Mullas chose to declare against us. And I'm telling you right now, we have your back.
▶ 5:54:16And there are a lot of my Democrat colleagues that do also. They're just afraid to say it out loud because they'll be crushed by the left of their party. And that is Um, so with that, whatever you guys need, you just holler. Okay, Mr.
▶ 5:54:34I couldn't say it any better. Thank you very much, Congressman.
▶ 5:54:37You're welcome, sir. With that, I yield back. Gentleman yields back. Chair and I recognize gentleman from Missouri, Mr. Bale. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, Mr. Secretary, I don't trust your judgment. Um, you made the comment to my colleague that there's no daylight between you and the president, which caused into question your role in again accountability. And so, I got to ask, has there ever been any time that you disagree with the president on this war or anything in general?
▶ 5:55:02I would never betray conversations that we've had. He commander can't even acknowledge that you've ever even disagreed with the man like his choice of tie that dance anything. You haven't disagreed on anything.
▶ 5:55:15I've never related to the discussions I have with the commander-in-chief.
▶ 5:55:18Okay. Because it seems to me that rather than being Trump Secretary of Defense, that sounds like you're just being Trump's secretary. And we need someone who's going to be there that is actually advising that is also pushing back when necessary and serving the country as opposed to the the uh president. So you said you've never called you've never called him out priv privately or publicly because we know that hasn't done but have you ever said the words and you don't have to tell me what it was about.
▶ 5:55:48Have you ever said the words Mr. President I disagree with you? As I said, I don't relay the private conversations that a commander
▶ 5:55:55you can't even acknowledge that like if you've just said, "Mr. President, I you're wrong about this or you're wrong about that." You you can't even acknowledge You can't even admit that. If that's happened,
▶ 5:56:06you can ask it again if you want, but I don't relay the private conversations that a commander-in-chief deserves.
▶ 5:56:10The objectives of this war have constantly shifted and changed. You see that though, right? like you can acknowledge that because one minute it was to dismantle the Iranian nuclear but how you know but you know I don't know how that objective um has not now been the listed objectives as far as I understand u then there was regime change um Trump even said when announcing the start of the war the hour of your freedom is at hand it will
▶ 5:56:40it's yours to take he also posted on true social in January help is on the aids to the Iranians posting in the street. Um, do you still believe in this particular
▶ 5:56:54The objectives have been clear from the beginning and I've supported the president throughout in having the courage to take on this threat.
▶ 5:56:59Okay. So, um, so then let's talk about what else is what else has he said like so let's talk about the Trump doctrine. So on on November 6th, the president said he was all about ending wars, not starting new ones. Yet in the so-called doctrine, the conflict has not answered why we're in the war. The objectives have changed. We're not sure about the exited exit strategy. This to me is the definition of open-ended or forever war. And you cannot claim to end forever wars while engaging in one.
▶ 5:57:29Um, and then here's the one that really gets me. So, I'll know when it's over when I feel it in my bones. So, Mr. Secretary, war decisions should be based on defined military objectives. You agree with that statement, correct?
▶ 5:57:47Um, it's the commander-in-chief makes the call on the American people when our objectives are are completed.
▶ 5:57:53There should be clear clearly defined military objectives. That's safe to say.
▶ 5:57:57Ultimately, the commander-in-chief makes the decision about when our objectives
▶ 5:58:01Okay. Because according because I'm just trying to figure out like what kind of analysis evaluation are we looking at with objectives when it's just what the president feels in his bones? Like are we talking about like some da Vinci puvian man or what? Like what are we talking about when we just talk about feeling it in your bones? Because my thing is we're not set up here to trust anyone's judgment. We're here to represent our district and districts and the American people.
▶ 5:58:30And so my my next question is the problem that I'm that I'm concerned with is that Iran continues to increase their negotiating leverage with us. And so we've been we've been told that the um we've won this war. It'll be over in a few days. Um but now they didn't control the straight of Hormuz and now they do have leverage in the straight of Hormuz.
▶ 5:58:57I remember even in the strikes in in June, after the strikes in June, I should say, they struck Alad Allad and we never responded to that. As a matter of fact, Trump even said he knew that strike was coming and he was he allowed it. Do you agree with that?
▶ 5:59:16Ultimately, the president's been clear about his objectives and if you if Iran thinks they're going to out deal the best dealmaker on the planet, they got another thing coming.
▶ 5:59:23But they struck us and we didn't strike back and you're okay with that? He even like said he author like he allowed it. He said that and you're okay with that.
▶ 5:59:33The president has done many bold things for this country to ensure Iran never has a nuclear weapon.
▶ 5:59:37Okay. Well, allowing another country to attack us. Isn't that treason?
▶ 5:59:42Allowing Iran to get a nuclear weapon recognizes gentleman from Arizona, Mr.
▶ 5:59:49I want to thank your team behind you for having the discipline, stamina for being here. I know what work uh was involved in doing this type of hearing. So, thank you all. Um, Mr. Secretary, I want to ask you about the A-10 Warthog. Uh, how effective has it been in the the war in
▶ 6:00:07Uh, as I'm sure you know, it's it's a very effective platform.
▶ 6:00:11Yes. And so why is the Air Force I mean they've been trying to retire this platform for 40 years since 1984 and it seems like it keeps proving itself no matter the technological advances that we have in the military. So why is there a need or push to retire this platform?
▶ 6:00:29Well, the push to retire the platform was previous administrations uh based on mostly requests from the Air Force. But given how I anybody of our generation knows uh how impactful, important, and significant the A-10 and the Warthog has been and that's what you want when you need close air support. Full stop. Everybody knows it to include when you've got down pilots and you need to go downtown uh Iran and it was incredibly effective in those missions. Now there are other places where it's less survivable and I understand that.
▶ 6:00:56But there's still most of the world where it is the most effective close air support platform. It's why I got with the Air Force Secretary. We extended it to 2030 and we're uh per the president's guidance going to look at other options maybe other variants and ways at which we can keep the A-10 uh capability or platform on the battlefield for our war fighters who want that kind of close air
▶ 6:01:16Thank you. I appreciate that. Just you know as technology advances sometimes we forget sometimes the old school uh machinery we have works just as well. I know you just you know got the the Apache helicopters. I mean that's a 50-y old frame. If you look at the AK-47s, my god, it's one of the most effective rifles and uh from 1947. So, I don't want to lose sight of that. You know, I think too much too much is spent on so many defense companies coming here selling us the newest, greatest product, but warfare warfare ultimately is about killing the enemy. And we know that Warhog does that.
▶ 6:01:46Um I want to shift focus a little bit to actually kind of old school as well. Um I know that SOF and SCOP right now there's been 3,000 positions cut mostly on SCOPS and civil affairs. Um, how is, you know, I've been wondering there's no we have air superiority in Iran and it seems like there's no internet connectivity in Iran. Are we doing any leaflet drops over there?
▶ 6:02:11Um, we've explored a a variety of different uh actions, many of which are classified, but that could restore additional communications capability to the Iranian people.
▶ 6:02:19I would love for President Trump's truth social post to be leafleted all over Iran, to be honest with you. I think that would uh encourage them to actually take to the streets. Uh, moving to Iraq, uh, I think there's budgeted right now about $118 million to the government of Iraq for the counter ISIS mission. Um, we know the problems that the Iraq government are facing right now.
▶ 6:02:40And you have personally said that you're going to have you're going to certify, you know, the spending on I mean, how do you think that this is an effective use of our money to give it to this government that we know is aligned with Iran and seems like it's becoming more difficult to deal with? Uh it's a very much an open question. We're paying very uh close attention to the new government there and the counterterrorism efforts. Some of which have been successful over time and others of which have not in this conflict where Iraq has not stepped up in those efforts.
▶ 6:03:11And we're reviewing funding basing every aspect accordingly just like we did in Syria. Uh the president directed that we leave Syria. We had eight bases. We went down to four, two, and then one. And now um ultimately are uh in northern Iraq. And we'll review our posture throughout the region. Great. With that, I yield back, Mr. Chair.
▶ 6:03:28Chair now recognizes a gentleman from New Jersey, Dr. Conaway.
▶ 6:03:32Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you and ranking member Smith for holding this hearing today. Thanks to the witnesses for presenting themselves uh to us uh to answer questions. Uh at the outset, let me say that I'm proud of the work that our service members do every day to keep our nation safe, and I have profound respect over those uh who voluntarily put on the uniform uh to serve and protect our country. The Trump administration's reckless military actions are driving up costs for everyday Americans.
▶ 6:04:02This war, as you know, is is um not supported by a significant majority of the people in this country. Um, the administration has increased military operations around the globe, including strikes in eight countries, and the war in Iran is costing taxpayers billions of dollars. Estimates are by the time it's over, it could cost a trillion dollars uh to the American people. A lot of that off budget.
▶ 6:04:26It's estimated that the first six days of the war cost around 12 billion dollars alone and we are now hitting 60 days uh of war fighting without a plan uh to exit uh this conflict. The administration has failed uh to transparently tell the Congress or the American people what the costs of the war are and and why we are uh at war uh and expects Americans to keep footing the bill.
▶ 6:04:53uh the controller has and thank you for coming sir uh given us an incomplete number and I understand we're in the midst of war and there are some uh they do have some challenges in that regard uh but uh the congress I think my colleagues would have appreciated um a more thoroughgoing cost estimate uh so that we may properly uh conduct uh oversight as is our duty. Um, I would agree with my colleague, Miss Goodlander about the department sharing the full breakdown of the cost of this war.
▶ 6:05:21Uh, and um, understanding where every dollar is, uh, going, uh, that, uh, number does not likely reflect the full costs of war. As you know, um, there are many estimates out there that say that this war will cost much more than uh, the you and the administration are uh, putting before the American people.
▶ 6:05:44Um, if you look at our past conflicts, uh, when we went to war in World War I, and this has been mentioned, uh, Wilson went to Congress and called for the American people to help pay for the war. Franklin Roosevelt, uh, went to Congress, asked for a declaration of war, and Americans pitched in to pay for this war. Conflicts after that, sadly, many, too many of them are off budget and are leaving Americans with trillions of dollars in debt.
▶ 6:06:10Average Americans are suffering the consequences of this war in Iran, including increased f fuel prices in my home state of New Jersey, where gas is now on average $4.20 a gallon. Diesel is almost $6 per gallon. In addition to increased fuel prices, everything costs more. Groceries, uh, housing costs, and people, uh, the people have to pay for it have not asked for this war and I think are a little bit bewildered as to why we're in this war.
▶ 6:06:38I'm not disputing the fact that the Iranian Iranian regime is a malignant, dangerous regime that has killed its own people and has dee indeed has killed Americans over the decades. I think where we disagree is what's the best way to get at Iran?
▶ 6:06:53Do we negotiate with them and control um the uh their access to nuclear weapons uh in a multilateral way that includes even included even Russia in the deal uh and the agreement that President Obama brought forward or do we go and try and and engage in a costly war in order to get at those nuclear weapons? I think that's where the principal conflict lies. How do we achieve the same goals costly war or through negotiation?
▶ 6:07:22Um and we've seen uh that apparently uh there wasn't a plan to deal with the action that Iran had to take. That is to close the straight up moose because it's the only thing you can do when you are the weaker country in an asymmetric conflict. Of course they were going to do that and I wonder whether or not the president was apprised of this uh before he took uh the actions that he has taken. Uh so let me just ask uh this question.
▶ 6:07:49Um let me before let's make this comment too. Uh this war is just uh uh 60 days so far. Uh and this thought that Americans wish to bear the consequences of increased fuel prices I don't think is borne out by the fact that um you know those costs impact people on a weekly basis bi-weekly basis.
▶ 6:08:13uh mortgages come and have to be paid, groceries have to be bought on a weekly basis and those gas prices squeeze are squeezing the American public. Uh so can you tell us um whether or not there was planning to deal with the in advance to deal with the closing of the straight hormones given uh the likely impact on world fuel prices?
▶ 6:08:33That will have to be for the record because m gentleman's time is expired. Chair not recognizes the ranking member for any closing comments he may have. Uh well, first of all, I want to thank the chairman for conducting this hearing. Obviously, there's a lot of passion on both sides. A lot of partisan stuff being thrown around. I think on this committee, we're all trying to serve the men and women who serve us as well as we possibly can. You handled it very well and in a difficult time. I appreciate the fairness of that.
▶ 6:08:57Um yes, we have a lot of issues, but at the end of the day, the Iran war is the biggest issue that we face, and I hope that you all, you gentlemen, would take seriously the concerns we have about where it's going and how it's going to end. Yes, it has not yet lasted as long as Vietnam or World War II, but we're also told it was going to last four to five weeks when it started. We were given an idea of what the mission has been. It's clearly gone beyond that. Um, we did not contemplate that we would have, you know, the straight of Hormoo shutdown or that we would have to implement a blockade.
▶ 6:09:26So, how we get to the result is something we really are going to want to hear from all of you about on a regular basis and what role the service members who are over there. some 50,000 are going to play in that. And and we all agree, Mr. Secretary, that Iran should not have a nuclear weapon. Is this really getting us there? That's the connection we want to see. And you can say, well, we had to start start a war to stop the nuclear weapon. That in of itself doesn't make it true. Um how is the war and the military action actually stopping that nuclear weapon?
▶ 6:09:55How does it put us into a better position? I think that's what we really need to hear um and what we'll have to continue to work on uh long after this hearing. But I thank our witnesses uh for coming before us. It is the democratic process. Um you know, we're all part of representative democracy. I have never met too many people at the Pentagon who loved coming over and talking to Congress. I get that. But I hope you understand how important and how necessary it is that the people's voices are heard and we do have an opportunity to to question uh and challenge the decisions that are made by our executive branches.
▶ 6:10:24We have a right to do under the Constitution. Actually, an obligation to do under the Constitution. So, look forward to continuing the conversation. And I thank the chairman again and I yield back.
▶ 6:10:33I thank the ranking member and I thank the witnesses. Uh thank you for your service to our country. Thank you for 6 hours of tough duty and uh you've done a great job. I want to end this hearing the way I started it. This is a historic budget request by this administration.
▶ 6:10:50We are in uh unacceptably low levels of spending historically and this president is meeting the moment with a budget request that meets the requirements that we have to meet if we want to remain at peace. This is about peace through strength. This budget will help us have peace through strength. And I urge uh my colleagues who are not in this chamber to pay attention to what we talked about today.
▶ 6:11:16Uh this department I think is is is done an admirable job of defending the budget. And with that thank you for being here. This hearing is adjourned.