Department of the Army Fiscal Year 2027 Budget Request

Committee co- will come to order. Uh, I welcome our witnesses and thank them for their service to our nation. Uh, today we'll hear from the Department of the Army, uh, regarding their FY twenty-seven budget request. Uh, as my colleagues are aware, I am laser focused on bolstering and expanding our industrial base. Last year we worked to fundamentally reform defense acquisition system uh via the Speed Act. The reforms enacted in the FY twenty-six NDA streamlined the process and significantly reduced the time it takes to field new military capabilities. This year, uh, the focus of the NDA will be expanding the industrial base, both organic and defense-wide. Our defense industrial base, long the envy of the world, has atrophied significantly. Our global munition stockpiles are low when we lack the capacity to rapidly restock magazine depth. The industrial base has shrunk and so has our ability to manufacture for our war fighters at speed and scale. Our government-owned depots, arsenals, ammunition plants, and shipyards are a vital component t- of our overall c- c- uh, capacity to manufacture and sustain critical capabilities. But as bad as the c- um contraction has been in the private sector's manufacturing capability it's arguably been worse in our organic industrial base. The OIB suffered from decades of neglect and underinvestment. Recent conflicts have exposed the weaknesses in the OIB. And the weakness in the OIB directly affects our readiness. Mission capable rates for critical weapons systems have fallen well below acceptable levels. I've been beating the drum for a long time on the decline of our OIB and the defense industrial base as a whole. I'm glad that President Trump shares my concerns. and has released a budget request that finally addresses this problem. The President has requested a historic one and a half trillion dollar budget for our national defense. This budget directly confronts the challenges in our defense industrial base with over one hundred billion dollars in investments to revitalize manufacturing expand uh domestic and allied critical minerals projects and secure our supply chains. We need to enact that budget and we need to rapidly turn that historic investment into cap- capability for our war fighter. That's why it is so critical to understand from the services how they plan to accomplish that goal. Last year, the secretary of the army uh offered the transformation initiative, or ATI. The goal was to position the army uh for future fights, streamline force structure, and eliminate wasteful spending. Congress shares those goals, but uh as questions arose uh it became clear that the army hadn't done all of its homework. ATI has since evolved into what is being called the continuous transformation. The name may have changed, but our questions remain. We'd like to see a concrete plan on how the Army intends to modernize, where it invests, where the investments will be made, what risks to readiness will be absorbed, and what impact it will have on the industrial base. We wanna make the sure the Army has done a careful analysis of how in transformation will affect our capabilities and force structure. We want to understand how the Army intends to sustain the legacy capabilities our service members still need and use. We want to avoid spending this historic influx of money ineffectively, and wasting the opportunity to bolster the dib. I'm confident that by working together we can transform the Army and revitalize our industrial base. With that, I yield to the ranking member for his opening statement.

Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I Completely agree. Um, innovation, innovating faster at scale is the core what we're trying to do. The Speed Act, uh, that you led last year and passed puts us in a good position to make progress on that. Acquisition reform is absolutely critical to getting to where we need to be. I also think the Army has been forward leaning on this, particularly in the last couple of years, have had the opportunity to go down to Austin a couple times, visit the training and transformation campaign. There is a real commitment in the Army to making those changes. I I do wanna thank both General George and General Hodney who really sort of pushed forward that effort, uh in a variety of different ways. Um they served our country very, very well. There was a lot more work to do, as the Chairman pointed out. We are not where we need to be on the defense industrial base, we're producing what we need to produce. And I look forward to hearing from both of our witnesses today about what can we do to increase that manufacturing get to the scale that we need. Uh the other point that I always like to make is we are going to need to do it in a cost-effective way. Um, I think it is highly unrealistic to ask for a fifty, sixty percent increase in the defense budget when we have our debt to GDP ratio over a hundred percent and we continue to cut taxes and reduce our revenue in a thousand different ways to the tune of trillions of dollars. That just doesn't add up and past a certain point, that is a national security threat to this country. Now the good news, I think, as I've looked at the technology that we have, we have the ability to meet our defense needs in a more cost-effective manner. Um, we have developed a number of new systems. There's a lot of private capital out there investing in cheaper missiles, cheaper drones, cheaper ways to shoot down drones, crucially, um, secure communication systems. So I really think we need to f- focus on how can we achieve our national security objectives in a more cost-effective way. And I worry that once again, as we have for the last twenty-five years, our approach is simply be, well, just, well, let's just throw Let's imagine that we have an infinite amount of resources, and it's just too important to care about how much it costs. Sadly, fiscal restraints are part of life as much as we wanna try to wish them away. So I wanna hear from our witnesses today about how they're planning on doing all this, but doing it in a way that we can actually afford. Uh, one piece of that, oh I'm sorry, two final issues that I just wanna make sure you address. Um, the money that DOD is giving to the Department of Homeland Security, Um, we have not been adequately imbursed for that. It seems like that money just goes into a black hole. They have their needs, but DOD has its needs. I'd love to find out if they're ever gonna pay back for that, and if we're gonna stop just having DOD subsidize DHS. The last point, uh, the Army is the lead agency on civilian harm. Um, this committee, uh, this Congress a couple years ago passed requirements in terms of funding, and I forget the exact name of it, a civilian harm center, to basically take a look and make sure that we are not killing civilians when we shouldn't be. Sorry, we should never be killing civilians. I should say that we are not, that we're being careful about how we fight our wars and we live within rules of engagement that make sense. As I understand it, the Department of Defense and Army has completely defunded that. You are in violation of the law right now on civilian harm. Um, I'd like to know either A, what the explanation is for why you think it's okay for you to ignore the law that Congress is passes, or B, what you're planning on doing to fix that problem. Um, with that, I yield back. Thank you, Mr. Sheriff.

Great. Thank you, ranking member. Uh, now I'd like to introduce our witnesses. We have the Honorable Dan Driscoll, Secretary of the Army, and uh, new to us, uh, General Christopher Lineve is the Acting Chief of Staff of the Army. Welcome. Uh, Mr. Driscoll, we'll start with you. You're recognized.

Chairman Rogers, Ranking Member Smith, distinguished members, it is a privilege to address you today. After a year in this position, I am prouder than ever to represent our soul and their amazing families. As all of you know, our soldiers are the very best in the world. They're bold, decisive, and they can overcome anything when we properly enable them. That's why I spent over a hundred and thirty days on the road, across nineteen countries and twenty-five states, to hear directly from them. I ate with them, put hands on their equipment, and had candid discussions with soldiers of every single rank. What I what I heard was clear. Our soldiers are ready to innovate and win, but our own bureaucracy and regulations are still holding them back. Getting what soldiers need to win and making the army budget actually work for them is definitely a bipartisan topic and I know all of you agree with that. You've supported our army for decades and we wouldn't be here without you. But we know the system that should benefit soldiers remains broken. Quality of life and battlefield advantage aren't always the number one budget priority. It's a simple fact and we need your help to continue We need right to repair language, relief from pre-World War Two laws, and significantly more budget flexibility. Thank you so much for last year's progress. But if we're going to win the next fight, we must go even further. Technological change is accelerating, warfare is evolving, and speed is absolutely critical. Your help to either lower barriers to innovation or stick to the decades-long status quo makes all the difference. I invite all of you to come see our transformation firsthand. We are partnering with private industry to adopt the best tech, talent and tradecraft. We're inviting those partners out to our bases to unlock dormant resources and offset federal budget delays. We're blazing a trail for our nation on nuclear energy, counter drone capabilities and military AI. Despite red tape, we're delivering better dining, barracks, WiFi and three D printed barracks. Even though it can feel like the deck is stacked against us, the United States Army is a beacon of transformation. For instance, as we speak, we are hosting the largest hackathon ever in human history to retroactively jailbreak our siloed equipment. It's named Operation Jailbreak. Last month in Europe, soldiers showed me how our software systems are compartmentalized, isolated and ineffective against modern threats. Meanwhile, Delta's, Ukraine's Delta Common Operating System, their modular open architecture command and control system is absolutely incredible. It fully integrates every drone, every sensor and every single shooting platform into just one single network. Ours does not. Unfortunately for decades, our budget process incentivized companies to protect their intellectual property at all costs creating walled gardens in our command and control architecture. This has been the status quo for far too long. It is no longer acceptable and indef- I contacted nine of our defense primes and other large partners, who immediately agreed to send thousands of pieces of equipment, engineers and scientists to Fort Carson. Together, we will force our way through the fire walls, link every system, and achieve true right to integrate. And this is just our first sprint on it. We will do it again and again and again until we get it exactly right. I wanna be clear, this is a perfect example of our army's No one else has the talent, the drive, and the obsessive work ethic like our soldiers to pull this off. Operation Jailbreak is the first of many sprints to bypass red tape and bureaucracy. What we're doing in Colorado should be the standard operating procedure going forward. It's the iterative process that makes uh make America's tech sector the very best in the world. But you would be amazed at the regulatory walls that stood in our way. And we've expanded sinful amount of energy just to do the right thing. Imagine what we could do if you continue to help us slash those restrictions. We can do more if you help us balance oversight with speed. We can maximize our budget if you help us partner with America's entrepreneurs. We can move faster if you help us shed obsolete equipment and invest in the future. And with your help, we can ensure the army remains the dominant land fighting force for the next two hundred and fifty years. Thank you so much for having us and I look forward.

Thank you, Mr. Secretary General. You're recognized.

Chairman Rogers, Ranking Member Smith, thank you for the opportunity to appear before this committee today. The credibility of our army is defined by what it is prepared to do, not what it intends to do. So every decision I make enables our soldiers to be more lethal and ready to fight and win and serve as the backbone of the joint force in the Indo-Pacific, where building a force postured to deter threats to U. S. national interest and designed to extend the operational reach and endurance of the joint force. Right now, eighty-seven thousand soldiers are campaigning throughout the region. Our typhoon missile systems are forward deployed to the Philippines and Japan. We positioned LTAMs in Guam and the IPIC uh unit in Korea, extending next generation air and missile defense against current threats in the region. The first and third multi-domain task forces are now operational in the region and this fall the fourth multi- domain task force headquarters will stand up at Fort Carson. Each MDTF brings together long-range fires, intelligence, electronic warfare, space and cyber, all integrated to a single theater level capability designed to support joint force commanders across vast distances of the Pacific. Every one of these capabilities exists because of the investments this committee supported. In the Middle East our army forces continue to We're here to defend U. S. personnel and partners while sustaining layered air and missile defense, long-range strike capabilities, and operational logistics across CENTCOM. And at home we're preparing the force for future conflict at our combat training centers. It's where we train our soldiers to fight against an adversary in the mud, to solve complex problems, and to test our latest systems. But we cannot field our modern kit while sustaining aging systems that consume time, money, and manpower. The vested in legacy platforms reduces the maintenance demand that falls hardest on our junior soldiers, and frees resources to advance next generation systems. That's why we restructured our, uh how we acquired design, sustain, and field equipment with a decisive focus on speed, the right to repair, and systems modularity. That thinking is already reflected in some of the next generation platforms we're going after, like the XM thirty infantry bi- fighting vehicle, the M one E three Abrams, and the MB seventy-five Cheyenne, which provides unprecedented speed, range, and flexibility. Each of these systems are designed so that the next operational upgrade requires integration not a completely new start but none of this matters, if we can't produce and sustain at scale. That's why we continue to modernize the OIB through advanced manufacturing, depot modernization, and expanded partnerships with industry, including enhanced use leases that accelerate infrastructure development, and capability. And while industrial capacity is important, the strength of our army is only as strong as our ability to retain experienced soldiers, and whether the force we're building reflects the standards we claim to uphold. That standard includes four billion in infrastructure investments throughout two, twenty twenty-six. We're rolling out campus-style dining facilities, we're scaling our holistic health and fitness across the entire force, and soldiers see the difference, and so do American citizens. Our recruiting numbers are soaring and we're on track to achieve this year's target way ahead of schedule. Because in the end, soldiers are the reason your army can do what it does. Your army delivers intelligence and fires that enable maneuver. We sustain operations, we protect the force. And we provide the command and control architecture that allows the joint force and America's allies to operate together. Every component of the joint fight depends on our army's ability to do all those things. simultaneously and exceptionally well. And we will not fail our country. This we'll defend. And thank you all for your continued support as we sustain the best army the world has ever seen.

Thank you, General. Uh, I recognize myself now for questions. General, I I read an ABC News article uh recently about you having to scramble um to slash some training cost uh and uh make some other adjustments to deal with a four to six billion dollar shortfall can you tell me why that shortfall occurred and and how it's impacting you. Turn your microphone on, please.

Yeah, thank you, sir. Sir, first off, we haven't canceled anything. Uh, the report is false, it's based off of prudent planning that we always do, you know, normally around this time of the year to take a look at what levers that we can pull as we m- near the end of the FY. We are, we do have a shortfall uh right now. And you, you talked about it uh Well, ranking member Smith talked about it in the opening statement about some of the reimbursements that were due uh back in.

Why don't you go ahead and address his question right now.

We're looking at the

How how you gonna are you gonna be backfilled by DHS with that with that money?

We believe we will, sir.

Do you know what the time frame is?

Uh, Chairman, we we've spoken with uh Secretary Mullen. We're working hand-in-hand with his team. We told your colleagues in the Senate a couple of days ago, we're optimistic within a week or two. Um, there should be meaningful mov- movement on that. We are equally aligned that we want that uh

Yeah, please do. We we will help you with that. You're supposed to be backfilled. And as I understand, the money is now available. Uh, but anyway, uh, secretary, you made reference to this in your opening statement. I want you to tell me more about this right to integrate. Uh, uh, how's it working? What's the goal? Exactly what is the right to integrate?

Yes, sir. So, uh, chairman, it is basically this idea that every single system that creates a piece of data should be able to share that data anywhere we the United States army need it to go. And then that system can receive data. Over the last thirty and forty years, the vast majority of our systems have been designed for closed purposes. Um, historically that did add a degree of security, but practically speaking, what that does today is it prevents you from being able to use things like agentic AI solutions and when you're thinking of drone swarms and the threats to react, a human being cannot do that alone. And so by breaking open these systems and allowing them to communicate with each other, that will push us forward massively to be able to transform our army.

Yeah, and I think that's gonna be essential for us to be able to use AI uh to its maximum potential. You also mentioned when you talked about it, us helping you break down some walls. Are there some statutory changes that you need us to make to facilitate that?

Um, Chairman, I think it's more on the right to repair side, the right to integrate side is we just have to do a better job as an army requiring it. And I just wanna give a a a very sincere positive statement about the large defense crimes who I'm on record uh bashing quite often. They've been incredible in helping us with this

Great news. Uh, I yield to the ranking member.

Uh, thank you, Mister Chairman, I yield my time to the gentlewoman from Hawaii, Mister Kuda.

Thank you, Mister Chair, Ranking Member. Secretary Driscoll, uh, the reason I'm actually going first to ask questions is because I'm gonna be jumping on a plane to go to graduation tomorrow. It's a big moment. Uh, and I

Congratulations.

thank you. It's been a long eighteen years. Um. I share this with you though, because it's an emotional time for a lot of families. It's a time when we watch our kids go away to the mainland. Many of them don't come back. See, from a young age where we understand that land is not just real estate, it's a promise of home. And we have seen so much of our land stolen, taken away, bought off. Whether it's the federal government or wealthy investors, we don't wanna lose even an inch. Even an inch. So I need you to understand the passion with which I have questioned many that came before you. Because for us it is deeply personal. And when you talk about condemnation, when the only language that we've seen put before the committee has been talks of being able to acquire this land through eminent domain. It breaks our heart, it angers us because we've already had too much stolen and you know for a fact the land we are talking about at Pohakuloa training area is already stolen land, and to steal it again would be absolutely Heva. It would be absolutely wrong to do this. And so I ask you as a mother today, looking back at the fact that more Native Hawaiians live outside of Hawaii, than in Hawaii. Because we don't have land to spare. Will you commit to me that we can take any language of condemnation, that we can rip it up. We can take condemnation completely off the table. And we can have a discussion about a real lease negotiation. Let's talk twenty-five years. Let's talk about real cash, not a dollar, for sixty-five years like it's been. Can we talk about taking condemnation off? taking that gun away from the head of the state and from all Native Hawaiians right now who feel that pain and simply talk about a lease renegotiation, terms and conditions, community benefits, working on the EIS. Can we do that, Secretary?

Uh, Congresswoman, um, I don't say this next statement lightly. The people of Hawaii have been absolutely incredible to our soldiers and their families for many years. Um, when I have gotten a chance to go visit, it is one of our most

Mister Secretary, Mister Secretary, I need to interject, I need to interject, cuz I don't have much time. cuz I don't have much time. You have thirty nine months. You have thirty nine months. You have time. You have time. You have time to do this the right way. You have time to do this the way. You have time to make sure that for this land that we are talking about, we can leave it to the next generation of Hawaiians to determine the sovereignty and autonomy of this land. Condemnation would take that away from them. Committing now that you will take that condemnation off the table, again, all language that has been submitted to committees, been in discussion with the governor, take away condemnation and talk about year leases. Have you ever talked about anything other than condemnation? Have we talked about a twenty-five year lease renegotiation in terms and conditions.

Congresswoman, my understanding from interacting quite often with the local government is, it is a practical impracticality that the state government can possibly even do a lease between now and twenty twenty five.

So has the has our state government then, the governor's office, who I assume you have been negotiating with, with Governor Green and his team, is that correct?

We've we've spoken with a number of local uh participants.

When you say state and local government. OK, so have they never put on the table simply a lease

Uh, Uh, congresswoman, congresswoman, the governor, the governor, his team, his team, all of the local advocates have fought all of the local advocates have fought incredibly tirelessly um and propose all sorts of solutions. My responsibility

Have solutions been anything other than condemnation?

My res- they have uh proposed a number of solutions. My responsibility as Secretary of the Army is care about our soldiers' their lethality.

We all care about our soldiers and want the best.

Right.

Can you tell me that right now we can take condemnation off the table and commit to a lease for negotiation? Every path is hard. It's about doing the the right way. That's what I'm looking for.

Uh, Congressman, we're, we have to leave all options on the table.

General ladies, time's expired. Sure not recognize gentlemen from Cal- uh South Carolina, Joe Wilson.

Uh indeed uh and indeed uh please it's uh South Carolina like uh with the secretary, North Carolina, so please don't get them confused. Uh with that in mind uh thank you Chairman Mike Rogers for your efforts in bipartisanship uh and it's exciting to see this uh hearing today. And as a thirty-one year veteran of the army guard myself uh with four sons who have served in Iraq Egypt or Afghanistan I have never been more proud. of America's military assisting Syria as the dictator Assad fled to Moscow assisting and arresting the dictator of Maduro of Venezuela eliminating the dictator Khomeini of Tehran Tehran while rescuing our pilot in Iran leaving no one behind hope for freedom is provided for the people of Syria and Venezuela and Iran our dictators are on the run around the world which uh historically I don't think that many have um disappeared in a year and a half, ever, but thank you for uh all of you uh for your success. I wanna thank the witnesses uh for your service, uh dedicated service in appearing today as the army confronts an- growing threats from the Chinese Communist Party, war criminal Putin, Iran, North Korea and other adversaries. Land power remains an essential in deterring aggression, reassuring allies and defeating threats across multiple We're now engaged in a multi-domain competition spanning industrial capacity, hypersonic missiles, cyber capabilities, drones, long-range fires, and contested logistics. As a, as courageous Ukrainians defeat war criminal Putin, just as we have uh learned missile defense uh from Israel, we can now learn about drone and robotics from the success of stopping working on Putin by the very talented people of Ukraine. With that in mind, uh, we must ensure that America's, uh, military remains, uh, modernized and strong, uh, truly for peace through strength. And, Mister Secretary, uh, to address the slow acquisition, uh, timelines for capabilities soldiers need now, whether that is long-range precision fires, the mobile tactical, uh, cannon, uh, counter-UAS, or contested sustainment, what is the army doing to facilitate acceleration of fielding timelines, while ensuring domestic suppliers consistent with President Trump's American first industrial-based strategy of prior to rise?

Congressman, um, I I couldn't agree more and I just wanna go on record stating how, uh, proud we are of our soldiers and everything they've done in the last year, under President Trump and Secretary of War Hex's leadership. United States Army has been able to move out and do things we haven't done in decades, to cut down the bureaucratic timeline to get our soldiers what they need. So specifically what we've done in the last year is we we cut down our PEOs, which were a number of siloed acquisition professionals with approximately fifteen steps along each process. Each of those steps could reset a purchase back to the beginning, and this led to outcomes where it could take two to four years to buy things we knew we wanted and needed. We have consolidated down to new PAEs. And as an example of the success, on day five of Operation Epic Fury, we knew we needed to see uh surge more counter drone solutions into theater. By day ten we had purchased twenty-three thousand and by day twenty they were starting to flow into theater with Ranger Regiment eighty-second helping to train our soldiers forward and that is all because of the um changes that we made to our acquisition.

Well, again the opportunities we have of learning from our allies, I I hope, there was an article yesterday in the Washington Times front page about the success of Ukrainian drones and robotics. uh to defeat uh Walker and Putin uh and uh and and the oppressed people of Russia. With that in mind too, I'm really grateful I represent Fort Jackson, the initial army training facility and General and Secretary, it's always exciting to be at the airport in Columbia and see these young people come in with a a brown envelope uh to be greeted by the drill sergeant. And so uh and uh and I I I look at it wait, look at the opportunities and uh fulfilling lives these young people are gonna have. With that in mind, there's a program there for the future soldier prep course. And I I've been really impressed with it and I uh, Mr. Secretary, I uh, as we approach issues, what is the future for the uh for that course?

Congressman, uh, I actually did basic training at Fort Jackson, South Carolina. Uh, and it was an honor to go back and I I would challenge any American that isn't feeling good about your country. Go watch a graduation at Fort Jackson, South Carolina as these um, previously civilians nine weeks before come out as soldiers and so

Gentlemen's time is expired.

You're ahead, you're ahead of the curve. You're ahead of the curve. Thank you. Thank you.

Uh,

Uh.

if you're not recognized, gentlemen from Connecticut, Mister Courtney.

Thank you, um, uh, Mr. Chairman. Um, Secretary, uh, Driscoll, on May first four thousand, uh, army soldiers of the second armored brigade combat team attended a color casing ceremony a se- a send-off ahead of deployment to Eastern Europe, that the army had announced, uh, last March. Uh, at the ceremony Major General Tom Felty, who's the head of the first cavalry division, gave some very stirring remarks where he said, quote, " Make no mistake, our adversaries are paying attention when an armored brigade combat team deploys forward, it sends a clear and unmistakable signal. The ABCT is the embodiment of American ground combat power. Given the fact that the administration just canceled uh this deployment a couple days ago we had people actually already over there right now I guess the the question sort of begs itself which is does is the opposite true if our adversaries are paying attention is the cancellation of a deployment of a brigade combat team sending uh again the opposite uh signal in terms of our commitment to our allies uh in Eastern Europe.

Uh sure, thank you for the question. Uh we we uh the COCOM Commander General Grinkowitz uh you know received the instructions uh on the the force reduction. I've I've worked with him in close consultation of what that force unit would be uh and it was it made the most sense for that brigade uh to to not do its uh its deployment in theater. Um we consti- continue to work closely with General Grinkovich and his team uh on ensuring that he has the right forces uh from us, the title ten you know uh headquarters here that mans trains, equips, and gets the units ready for their deployments. So uh we worked with him on uh what would be the the unit that would uh would not execute the mission.

Well, again, I think uh General Felty is right, that our adversaries are paying attention and that uh I mean I appreciate the answer, but frankly I don't think that really um rises to the moment in terms of just again, the the situation that exists in Europe and frankly it's not just our adversaries that are paying attention, it's our allies. Uh Poland, which is apparently where the deployment was at least gonna uh you know begin and originate um has is an ally that's spending four point eight percent uh of GDP in terms of uh their defense budgets and and all the other Baltic countries are up in that range as well and given the fact that the administration also cancel or is pulling back five thousand troops out of Germany um I I'm sorry I just think this is a horrible message uh that again our adversaries and allies uh are paying attention to uh Mister Secretary um uh Chairman Rogers talked about the fact that this committee is laser focused on the industrial base which uh again I think there's bipartisan lockstep unity uh on that question. Your budget um cuts aviation uh arm fixed wing uh uh aviation, rotary wing uh aviation in at uh to historic levels. A couple days ago Secretary Hegseth appeared before uh the House Armed Services Committee. My colleague from Connecticut um Miss Deloro raised the point about, you know, you are decimating the industrial base with that radical uh reduction uh in investment um which by the way uh the army national guard is was requesting twenty four black hawks in in their uh twenty twenty seven uh statement that's there uh secretary hegseth actually said he agreed that we need to take another look at that uh quote unquote uh during the the hearing and i just would ask you whether you agree with secretary hegseth that that um you know the the the impact in terms of the industrial base requires a second look

Um, uh, Congressman, from your reference to his remarks, I don't know all the depth of what was implied, but I absolutely agree that we will take a, um, a hard look with the office of secretary of war and make sure that we are synched with uh their strategy and their plans as they look across the joint force and balance their world requirements and needs of the military as a whole.

The critical part of the industrial base, which uh uh this committee is gonna be very um attentive to as we get closer to mark up a yield back.

Gentleman yields back. The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Ohio, Mister Turner.

Thank you, Mister Chairman, uh, Mister Secretary, thank you for also your focus on the issue of production. Uh, it is the the main issue that we're all trying to address. Uh, in Ohio, we have the Joint Systems Manufacturing Center, also known as the Lyman tank plant, and it is one of those uh facilities that is a a great illustration of the struggles or the issue that we face in trying to increase production. We just had an industry panel and they identified one of the greatest uh difficulties in trying to increase production as the inconsistent demand signals that come from the Pentagon uh because it both affects the issue of costs and also production schedules and therefore capacity. It affects their ability to go and attract capital out in the market. It affects their ability to have healthy supply chains. Many times supply chains can even dry up with a inconsistent demand signals from the Pentagon. It affects their ability to maintain a workforce. Um, and the, they, they indicate that many times the Pentagon acts like that they, that they can just turn on and off production and then come back tomorrow and it would just just be there. They need to be able to plan and project in the future. Now, at the Joint Systems Manufacturing Center in the past, uh, I have seen in trying to support the Lyman tank plant in Ohio, you know, over, for example, a four consecutive year period, the army has in the past zeroed out funding for army, uh, for Abrams tanks, only then to come back and request funding for a hundred and thirty-five tanks. Two years later, uh, funding has fluctuated between a hundred and sixty-five tanks, and then gone to as few as thirty-four tanks. Now, this is a government-owned facility that is contractor-operated. It's as if the Pentagon looks at the army tank plant as if they're going to an auto dealership to buy vehicles, when obviously they can't. They they own the workforce, they own the supply chain, and if no one has responsibility for this at the Pentagon, then the supply chain, uh, dries up, the workforce, it moves on, and then we don't have an ability to uh to focus on on production. I appreciate that you're focusing on this, but when we look at the fiscal year twenty-seven army budget the request has for the joint system center a total spending level of three hundred and nine million dollars for inc- infrastructure investment at the joint system manufacturing center alignment plant which is a two hundred and fifteen percent increase over FY twenty-six levels excellent the budget also includes funding for the upgrades twenty-two M one A two Abrams for a total of a six hundred and fifty-four million decrease over fiscal year twenty-six funding. The lower quantity of M one A two upgrades and huge increase in investment at the plant is in part as a result of the development of the army transitioning to the production of the new M one E three main battle tank at Lima I'm concerned that the gap in funding between decreasing M one A two upgrades ramping up of the M one E three will leave a gap in work at the line, forcing either layoffs or relocations, again, the supply chain and the workforce will be impacted so that when we go back to for production for the M one E three, we're gonna have this this spigot turning on and off aspect that will impact production. Um, so what are the army's plans for transitioning from the M one A two upgrades to the M one E three production and how do we get which I know you're struggling with, how do we get to the point where the Pentagon can actually uh project and take into consideration its understanding of up and down its supply chain and up and down its workforce of actually a facility that the government owns, only one in North America.

Uh, Congressman, we've we we've tried to work hand in glove with General Dynamics, who is the uh contractor at the Lima plant. Um, this is one of the issues that the longer I've been on the seat, the more complex I realize it is. And it's complex because we don't operate like a private business. And I know all of you know that, but because we can't do things like at scale multi-year procurement, because the average secretary of the army is only in the seat twenty three months, because all of you have preferences on where the dollars go that don't mat necessarily match where we think they should and that's okay, that's good government. That makes it where it is very difficult to provide long-term demand signals. And so if you think of why things like cost plus come to be, it is because we the government or we the army when we tell industry what we want, by the time that thing is actually there we may have changed our mind for all sorts of reasons. We, under continuing resolutions, which I think ached in the last twenty years, we can't do new starts. So they just can't trust us.

Which have horrific impacts on you.

And so we end up doing all of these kind of backwards economic structures like cost plus pricing, which no one would prefer, but these are the reality

Let us help you. As you come up with recommendations to address these issues,

we have to face.

let us help you and give us recommendations to effect it, cuz we understand it affects capital, costs and production.

Of course.

Thank you, Mr. Secretary.

Thanks, Congressman.

Thanks much. Gentleman Neal's back. Chair now recognizes a gentleman from California, Mister Girimendi.

Uh, thank you. Uh, I wanna follow up on what my colleague Mike was talking about and also, um, my colleague Joe here. It comes down to where are you going? What is the future of the army? You have this army transformation initiative. Uh, it appears as though it goes left on Monday and right on Tuesday, there's not a consistency. This committee must have from you, Mister Secretary and and General a very clear understanding of what the Army transformation initiative is in all of its major elements. Um we just heard a discussion about um Abrams tanks. And uh we heard a discussion earlier about the a force in Poland or not in Poland. And so what we're seeing is here is a significant inconsistency of direction. And we need to know, we're gonna put together the NDAA in the days ahead, and that NDAA has to, I assume, assume the army is really interested in its transformation initiative. What exactly is it that you intend to do? What are the top three f- or five parts of that initiative? We're going to have to give you the authority, or maybe we disagree and don't want you to go in that direction. But what we're seeing here is enormous inconsistency in direction. And that is not going to suffice as we put together the future um direction and laws that the army is going to have to carry out. Uh, there is also a very serious problem in the mission capability rates of all of your equipment. It's trending negative. How are you going to address that? And is that part of the uh transformation initiative? I would hope that the ability to maintain your equipment is part of that. It's fundamental. And yet what we're seeing over time is a lack of attention by the army on the ability to maintain its equipment. How are you going to address that? There's a pile of money coming your way, at least in the uh president's budget. Will that be used for the initiatives in the uh army transfer uh transformation? Will it be used for maintaining your equipment? How are you going to deal with that? And finally, What lessons have you learned from Ukraine? So let's go at this one at one at a time. The Army Transformation Initiative. What are your three major actions, Mr. Secretary?

Uh, Congressman, uh, action one is until data can be shared between every system seamlessly on the business side of the army we always describe the army as two core functions one is a killing machine on behalf of our nation that we hope we don't need the other is a large enterprise scale business. When we came in about a year and a half ago we had six hundred fifty individual siloed business systems. We've cut it down to about two twenty. We're trying to get into the teens.

So that's an organizational issue.

That is a purchasing acquisition silo breaking issue,

You're reorganizing your bureaucracy.

Congressman.

All right, that's one. How about two and three?

Uh, two is all of our equipment. Every single thing that my colleague, uh, General Lee mentioned, every piece of equipment we buy has to be modular in an open architecture, which practically means it should have things like USB ports, so that whatever technology in the future exists in the put in the system.

Just heard a discussion about we're going to buy, we're not gonna buy tanks, we are gonna buy tanks. is it does this initiative focus in on exactly what you're going to need in the future? General?

Sure, I think it does. Uh, y- when you take a look at our equipment, and and the answer is yes and yes, we're not walking away uh from uh the ability to repair our equipment. That's the right to repair, the ability to be able to manufacture our own parts that that we need to be able to do on legacy equipment, uh I really look at it in three bins,