Summary
- Administration officials defended President Trump's $87.6 billion supplemental request covering Iran operations, farm aid, disaster relief, and munitions replenishment before Senate Appropriations Committee.
- Brooke Rollins (Secretary of Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture) said $10 billion in bridge aid would sustain row and specialty crop producers amid rising costs.
- Sen. Collins (R-ME) pressed Dan Caine (Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Joint Chiefs of Staff) on training cuts and readiness risks without supplemental funding.
- Republicans backed Iran operations and munitions replenishment while Democrats condemned the unauthorized war's costs, inflation, and depleted stockpiles and demanded congressional authorization before further funding.
- Committee will weigh emergency farm, disaster, and defense funding as wildfire, hurricane, and Strait of Hormuz pressures intensify before fiscal year end.
Morning digest
Get hearings like this in your inbox
Transcript
thank you this hearing of the senate appropriations committee will come to order before we begin our hearing today i want to take a moment to recognize the american service members who recently made the ultimate sacrifice while serving our nation. We extend our deepest condolences to their families, loved ones and fellow service members. And we honor their courage, dedication and sacrifice. We also grieved today in the first meeting of the appropriations since his passing, the absence of our friend, our dear friend and colleague, Senator Lindsey Graham. Turning now to the first panel, I want to express my appreciation for Senators Rounds, Budd and Padilla for appearing before the committee today to talk about the urgent needs facing their states. I also welcome Secretary Hexeth, Secretary Rollins, and General Kane, and thank them for joining us to discuss the President's supplemental funding request. Our country has many urgent funding needs. For many agricultural producers, twenty twenty five was a year in which the cost of growing their crop at times exceeded what they could earn from selling it. Severe weather compounded these losses. This was certainly the case for many growers in the state of Maine. Our wild blueberry growers and apple producers had to contend with the challenge of a combination of challenging market conditions and excessively rainy spring that prevented pollinization and drought conditions in the summer and fall. I expect that we will hear a great deal today about how declining commodity prices, rising input costs, labor shortages, trade disruptions, pests and disease, and increasingly volatile weather are squeezing our farmers already thin margins. Nationwide, we have lost two hundred thousand farms in the last decade. In Maine alone, more than five hundred closed between twenty seventeen and twenty twenty two, according to the most recent census of agriculture. Our farmers are part of the fabric of America's rural communities, and they need help to survive. USTA has said that additional short-term assistance is needed to help producers weather these extraordinary conditions while long-term improvements take hold. I look forward to today's discussion and making sure that any assistance is structured to meet the needs both of Roe and specially specialty crop producers, such as we have in Maine. We will also hear today about the ongoing recovery needs of communities in North Carolina, as well as communities in California, and I suspect other states too, that are still working to rebuild after being head by devastating hurricanes and wildfires. I would note that the administration's statement that it is open to discussing additional relief for other urgent matters is encouraging because there is strong interest from members on both sides of the aisle in discussing additional targeted relief. Turning now to the defense request. I look forward to hearing from our Department of Defense witnesses and their discussion on why the supplemental funding is critical to supporting our service members and protecting America's national security. There are certainly divergent views on this committee about the decision to use military force against Iran. The Senate as a body has already taken numerous votes on these issues and will likely continue to do so. But irrespective of our differing views about the military operations, the fact remains that there are must-pay bills and urgent requirements facing the department that affect the ability of our troops to be well-trained. and more broadly of the US military to deter and defend against potential aggressors worldwide. I would note that some of the requirements, such as the shortfalls in munitions, have been well known to this committee for some time, and prior to the conflict with Iran, there has been bipartisan support to address these shortfalls. While these munition shortfalls have been years in the making, they are growing increasingly urgent. We should not undermine the readiness of our service members for any engagement, or refuse to rebuild critical capabilities. Our men, women in uniform, do not decide where they are sent or the missions to which they are assigned. Congress has the responsibility to ensure that they have the tools, the training, and the support that they need to accomplish their missions. On the topic of our service members, I would be remiss if I did not note that since january of last year the department has removed a number of senior generals and admirals from their positions blocked or altered promotion lists across multiple services and intervened in several senior assignments a recent new york times story reported that about forty senior officers were removed from promotion lists, and more than two dozen generals and admirals were fired or sidelined, including Admiral Lisa Frank Frank Ketty, the first woman to lead the Navy. The Times further reports that more than half of those fired or removed have been female or black. and that for the first time in more than a decade, no active duty female naval officers are likely to be promoted to admiral. I find this deeply troubling. These are men and women who volunteered to serve our country and swore an oath to support and defend our constitution. Over the course of their careers, they have earned the support and the trust of their commanders and subordinates, led our men and women in uniform, and were selected through rigorous command and promotion boards. They have served under presidents and defense secretaries from both parties. Reports that women and people of color are disproportionately fired or sidelined, create the impression that their service is not valued. This is likely to discourage well-qualified women and individuals of color from joining our armed forces, thus depriving us of their talent, dedication and patriotism. The United States military is one of the greatest meritocracies in the free world. We need to make sure that it stays that way. I now recognize Vice President Murray for her opening statement.
Uh, thank you very much, Chair Collins, and thank you to all of our witnesses who are here today. I first, too, do wanna acknowledge the loss of one of our colleagues on this dais. Like so many, I was very shocked and saddened to learn of Senator Graham's passing. We disagreed on many issues, but there was no denying the energy that Lindsay brought to this job. And whenever we could, we found common ground and managed to get something done. So I just wanted to express that my heart goes out to his family, friends and loved ones today. Now I wanna start with a few facts. A hundred and forty-three days ago, President Trump started a war of his own choosing with Iran. He did not consult Congress. He did not get authorization from Congress. He did not build a coalition of allies. He did not make a case to the American people. Nor did he ever win their support. Two thirds of Americans opposed the war. And the president's decision had catastrophic costs. Seventeen American service members have now died. And that includes three who tragically lost their lives over the last few days, and another is still missing. Sender- several hundred more have been injured, including nearly a hundred who've been hurt just in the last few weeks. We owe all of them and their families a debt of gratitude that we can never repay. Thousands of civilians have also been killed, and this administration will not tell the public or Congress the true financial costs of this war. But we know it is very well into the tens of billions of dollars. Tax dollars we could have spent helping people afford health care, or building new housing, have now been lit on fire by a president who blundered us into a disastrous war. And the cost to families' bank accounts are staggering. Economic growth has slowed to a crawl. Inflation has shot up about fifty percent since this war began. On average, gas costs just under three dollars on February twenty eighth. Today it is over four dollars and ticking back up with the straight closed again. Americans have now paid more than seventy billion dollars more on gas since this war began that is over five hundred and fifty dollars more per household. Fertilizer costs skyrocketed in the middle of spring planting. crushing farmers operating on extremely thin margins, and costing families more on just about everything they buy at the grocery store. The costs of this war have been astronomical. And what it is, what has it been for? What has actually been achieved? We hear a different rationale for this war every few days. It was about preempting imminent threats, which we now know did not exist. It was about regime change. then liberating the Iranian people. It was about destroying Iran's nuclear program and its navy. And at one point it was about taking out its ballistic missiles, until that is, until the president decided that actually, and I quote, "it's a little bit unfair for them not to have some." Trump has even suggested the wars about taking Iran's oil to quote "make a fortune". And now, the United States' primary strategic objective seems to be to actually just reopen the Strait of Hormuz, which of course was fully open toll-free before this war began. President Trump has by any objective measure failed to achieve his goals. Our country is no safer or better off than before the war. In fact, we are considerably less safe. Our stockpiles have been depleted, and it will take years of production to fully replenish them, no matter how much money is thrown at this problem. Our global forced posture is much weaker, and as assets have been moved now to the Middle East. And we are now much further away from a long-term solution to halt Iran's nuclear program than we were before Trump ripped up the deal that President Obama negotiated which secured actual, measurable commitments and progress without ever starting a costly war. In fact, there are new reports that Iran may have moved nuclear assets into a mountain bunker. which raises concerns about whether Iran might restart its program. It used to be a pretty somber and serious thing, a president taking America to war and costing lives and taxpayer dollars. But this president has been downright flippant. The people I represent worry Trump thinks this is all a game and has sent men and women into harm's way without any sort of plan. And now that he's driven that car into the ditch, taxpayers to bail him out. As the daughter of a World War Two veteran and a Purple Heart recipient, the way this White House has blissfully operated with no plan for success is disrespectful to our men and women in uniform. These are patriots. They are highly trained and have sacrificed tremendously to keep us safe. They shouldn't be forced to put a show on for the president's birthday parade or do the job of Border Patrol agents. or risk their lives in a disastrous war that the president clearly failed to think through. And as a US senator, this administration's refusal to explain what it is doing or how this war is protecting Americans, its refusal to seek authorization from Congress, and its expectation that Americans will now just pay for it all, without any explanation or transparency, is disrespectful. And it's insulting to the people back home that all of us represent. So here we are, five months later. The Strait is closed. The ceasefire hasn't just disintegrated. This, this war is now spiraling out of control again. The president is threatening escalation and war crimes, and suggesting this could be another forever war. He has told us over forty times now that a deal is near and the war will be over soon. But now, he is asking for seventy billion dollars more. And for us to just trust him, it'll work out fine. Look, I've been very clear, my Democratic colleagues and I will do absolutely everything to ensure that we do take care of our service members and keep this country safe. Chairman Kaine, I hope you know that every Democrat on this committee deeply respects the sacrifices that you and our service members and their families are making. Everyone who signed up to serve our country deserves to be more than an afterthought in a war that the president decided to launch despite all the blinking red warnings. But my colleagues and I cannot and will not support rubber-stamping a request to bankroll this war and whatever other misadventures Trump wants to get us into next. The American people want to see a quick and strategic end to this war, not seventy billion dollars of their tax dollars sent to keep it going. And I wanna make a few important points. First, the President's request is not even a primarily a primarily a request to cover the costs of the Iran war. This request is chock full of asks to fund unrelated DOD priorities which should be considered through our annual appropriations process, not in an emergency supplemental. And that includes almost a billion dollars for nearly a billion dollars to keep deploying the National Guard here in DC, and more than a billion dollars for the southern southern border. Secondly, President Trump is making this request as the Pentagon has a record breaking one trillion dollar total budget for FY twenty-six, including over seventy five billion it has it has in unspent money from Republicans, big ugly Bill. Understand you may have mis- managed your budget, Secretary Haegstaff, but you have to do your d- due diligence to fix the cash flow problems you've caused before asking taxpayers for more. Third, the the President is now asking for all of us to approve tens of billions of dollars in new funding for the war while his administration still has yet to share actual cost estimates, essential information to justify this request, and a plan for where on earth this conflict goes next. This administration is either hiding the truth from Congress and the American people, or if you take at face value what they've said and in the few briefings that we've had, they have no idea what is going on and no plan to right the ship, neither of which is acceptable. Now, Trump is also asking Congress for over ten billion dollars to help struggling American farmers who have been crushed first by the tariffs and then by this war, which has shot fertilizer and diesel costs through the roof. I'm digging into that request, but let me be clearer. As we're looking at what farmers might need to weather Trump's storm, we must also help families put food on the table. And to do that, we should delay and ultimately reverse Republicans' deep cuts to SNAP, which have already kicked at least one million kids off of food assi- assistance. Finally, Trump has also requested an I had to read this one twice to believe, one point three billion dollars in new funding for the State Department for Global Health and Humanitarian Needs. At the very same time, his administration is withholding more than twice that amount in funding that has already been signed into law and is available for the same purpose. He's also asking for authorities to make US taxpayer dollars subsidize the Venezuelan oil industry and to finance the establishment of private investment funds like the one he just handed over to one of his ballroom donors. Unfortunately, Secretary Rubio is not here with us today to explain those requests, to talk about how this war forced one of the largest evacuations of our diplomatic posts ever, or to explain whether as a national security advisor he still thinks this war is, quote, the right decision, and whether he still, still quote believes in it strongly. So, this is really a request to make tax pay for the President's reckless decisions from the Iran War, to his trade wars, to his global health cuts. All while doing nothing to help our families back home who are suffering because of those decisions. And that, that is what we should be focused on, helping people. Because as Senator Padilla and others on both sides of the aisle will tell us shortly, there are urgent domestic needs that we should be addressing, instead of sending more money for Trump to drop bombs overseas. Priorities like disaster relief for our communities that have rav- been ravaged by the unthinkable, or taking action to lower families' costs. You know what's the crisis right now? The fact that there are families I hear from back home who are working full time and still being forced to decide whether to skip meals so they finally can buy their kids a pair of shoes. You know what's the crisis? The fact that hospitals are shutting down and kids are going hungry because of Republicans' cuts. Instead of bankrolling the president's war or sending ICE seventy billion dollars, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle could work with us to quadruple our investments to cure cancer or help families afford child care or help them afford to cool their homes. Those are policy choices. And Republican leadership has chosen to focus on funding war and ICE endlessly without a single cent for our American families. So let me close with this. This president says we can afford, can't afford health care. We can't afford child care. We can't afford housing. But somehow we can always afford another war. No price tag on that. Families in Washington State are skipping doctor's visits so they can afford groceries. Trump wants to Congress to cut him a blank check for a war that no one supports. The American people interest us to spend their taxpayer dollars strategically and thoughtfully. This is a huge responsibility, so let me be clear. I'm ready to work with my colleagues in a bipartisan way as always to address the needs of our nation and the American people. But I hope we can have real conversations about why there seems to always be money for Trump's wars but never money for the families back home who are desperate for a little relief. So I look forward to today's discussion. Thank you.
I will now introduce our first panel of witnesses. Today we're going to be hearing first from our colleagues, Senator Mike Rounds of South Dakota, Senator Ted Budd of North Carolina, and Senator Alex Padilla of California. I welcome all of you, and Senator Rounds will begin with you first.
Chair Collins, Vice Chair Murray, and members of the committee. thank you for the opportunity to highlight why food security and national security go hand in hand. I'd also like to thank the Trump administration for recognizing that input pressures have made it more difficult for American farmers to support their own operations. In South Dakota, farming and ranching is more than a job, it's a way of life built on hard work, stewardship, and the hope of leaving the land better for the next generation. Feeding and fueling the world has never been easy. Producers continue showing up year after year, despite drought, floods, disease, pests, volatile markets, and other challenges beyond their control. This supplemental funding request comes at a critical time. Farmers and ranchers are facing production costs that exceed market returns. Higher fertilizer, diesel fuel, seed, equipment, and crop protection costs. coupled with retaliatory trade practices and continued market uncertainty have put enormous have put enormous financial pressure on producers. Specifically, the projected loss per acre across the country in twenty twenty six for corn is a hundred and thirty one dollars, for cotton, three hundred and forty two dollars, for wheat, a hundred and fourteen dollars, and for soybeans, eighty dollars. While we work to strengthen America's ability to produce more of what we need here at home, and reduce reliance on foreign supply chains, Congress should provide stability so producers can remain in business and continue producing the best food and fuel in the world. Today's threats extend well beyond weather and markets. Foreign adversaries, cyber threats, industry consolidation, arbitrary standards and unfair trade practices impact farmers' ability to produce food, fiber, and fuel. Food security, energy security, and national security are connected. We also have an opportunity to strengthen both agriculture and energy security by permanently authorizing voluntary access to nationwide year-round sales of E fifteen. giving consumers the option to choose a higher ethanol blend would increase domestic fuel production, expand markets for corn growers, reduce reliance on foreign energy sources, and provide families with lower cost options at the pump. Given the significant defense investments included in this supplemental, I also want to emphasize the importance of fully funding our national defense. We are living in one of the most complex and lethal threat environments. since the second world war. And the brave men and women who volunteer to defend this country deserve the leadership, training and equipment along with resources necessary to maintain America's military advantage. Protecting America's food supply, energy supply and national defense are not separate priorities, they reinforce one another. This supplemental provides needed assistance to help
Thank you, Senator Browns. Senator Budd. Senator Budd.
Chair Collins, Vice Chair Murray, members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify this afternoon to provide a voice for the people in Western North Carolina. More than twenty-one months ago, Hurricane Helene unleashed an unprecedented amount of rainfall on the Blue Ridge Mountains, causing severe flooding and devastating landslides. The storm left behind tens of billions in damage. In December twenty twenty four, Congress responded by approving a disaster supplemental that provided billions of dollars to Western North Carolina recovery. Additionally, North Carolina's state government stepped up by committing roughly two point four billion dollars in state appropriations and redirecting more than two billion dollars from state agencies for reconstruction. But the Blue Ridge Mountains' challenging terrain has made it uniquely difficult for federal programs to operate, resulting in delays and inefficiencies. And there's still work to be done. Too many projects in Western North Carolina have stalled due to insufficient funding or because of financial shortfalls from expensive debris removal and rebuilding efforts. Uh, I greatly appreciate that President Trump and Secretary Mullen have empowered FEMA to more rapidly reimburse the state and local governments for public assistance projects. However, FEMA is only one part of the equation. The Environmental Protection Agency Department of Housing and Urban Development and other federal agencies play a key role in disaster recovery. And much of the existing disaster funding for those agencies has already largely been allocated. When I visit Western North Carolina, I see the impacts the delays in the recovery have recal- have caused. Debris still clogs the waterways. Facilities that provide drinking water and manage wastewater have yet to be rebuilt. Most concerning, some homeowners paying mortgages on properties that are still unlivable or yet to be rebuilt. Towns have been forced to embrace expensive short-term stop-gap solutions just to carry out their most basic functions for the residents. In the small town of Beach Mountain, there is no long-term water supply. The dam and water treatment plant were heavily damaged, forcing the town out of compliance with state state safety standards. And as a result, the the state could be finding Beach Mountain, twenty five thousand dollars per day. Most repairs are needed so that the water treatment plant can function long-term. If funded, this process will take at least a year and require significant diversion of utilities and or daily water trucks just so hundreds of residents will have to have clean drinking water during construction. Three years is too long to wait after a disaster, and we can't delay any longer. Tourism the lifeblood of much of Western North Carolina has begun to rebound. But there's still far too many areas that are unable to accommodate the travelers they once welcomed. But I want to highlight a few examples of success stories to show how ample funding for the last disaster supplemental, paired with exceptional planning and project execution, made an immediate impact on our mountain communities. Last July, portions of the Blue Ridge Parkway reopened after fifty-seven landslides struck two hundred miles of the parkway. This Memorial Day weekend, Lake Lure reopened the public uh to the public after an incredible debris removal and refilling project. And I want to be clear that I fully support President Trump's request to replenish our munition stockpile and strengthen our military. And I'm also appreciative of his efforts to provide economic assistance to farmers, impacted by disasters and unfair trade practices. However, to address the long-term recovery needs of Western North Carolina, more federal funds are needed. Every time I'm in Western North Carolina, people ask me to make sure that they're not forgotten. This is Congress's chance to remind them that we're serious about helping them get back on their feet. I'm deeply grateful to the members of the committee for holding this hearing, and I look forward to continuing to work with you throughout this whole process. Thank you.
Thank you, Senator Budd, Senator Padilla.
Thank you, Madam Chair, uh, Vice Chair Murray, members of the committee. Appreciate the opportunity to testify on behalf of the people of California. And especially the survivors of last year's devastating fires in Los Angeles County. And I wanna acknowledge that some of them are here in the audience today, uh, advocating, uh, for relief and I'm proud to work alongside them. as many of you recall eighteen months ago sixty thousand acres across southern california burned that's roughly three and a half times the size of manhattan over sixteen thousand homes businesses schools and other structures were destroyed and most devastatingly thirty one californians lost their lives to respond more than seventy five hundred firefighters worked literally around the clock for three more than three weeks to extinguish the fires and those firefighters were just from california many came from our neighboring states of oregon washington arizona some as far away as utah texas and montana colleagues because as americans that's what we do we help each other we don't condition our response based on who a community voted for in the last election when americans need help we help now walking around the palisades and the altadena communities during the fires and after the fires you couldn't help but be moved by the scale of the devastation the images of nothing standing but a chimney amongst a a pile of ash cars literally melted into the streets where the drivers where they had been parked in the wake of disasters like this congress has historically come together on a bipartisan basis to provide aid and long-term recovery funding to help communities recover and rebuild regardless of whether the disaster was in a state represented by republicans or democrats but instead of following that historical practice this administration has left california waiting for more than a year and a half while asking congress to fund hundreds of billion dollars for other purposes I wanna be crystal clear. No disaster impacted community, regardless of where it is located, should ever be held hostage or treated as a bargaining chip for other political priorities. Californians in Altadena and the Palisades have now waited more than eighteen months. Yet long-term recovery funding is still absent from even the administration's request. Instead, it asks taxpayers to spend hundreds of billions of dollars more on a war that Congress has never authorized a war that's raising gas prices worsening supply chains, making our country less safe and for which seventeen service members have already paid the ultimate sacrifice with many more seriously injured now we know this committee can address disaster relief without tying it to a a laundry list of unrelated priorities Because it's done so many times before, including as recently as December twenty twenty four, when the committee on a bipartisan basis passed more than a hundred billion dollars of relief. There's no reason we can't do it again. Congress, we must, uh, excuse me, colleagues, we must reject the premise that it is OK to keep survivors waiting for help because the president, any president, decides they need something else from Congress to get it. To that end, I do wanna thank my colleagues, Senators Tillis, Schiff and Curtis, for joining me in sending a bipartisan letter to the committee just yesterday, supporting long-term disaster recovery funding. Madam Chair, I'd like to enter this letter into the record at this time.
Thank you, Senator Padilla.
I'm I'm not there,
Whoops, I'm sorry.
just wanna enter the letter to the record.
No. Without objection, it will.
Thank you. and uh i'll be uh wrapping up soon here i uh also wanna reiterate what i said earlier we know the next disaster is coming anyone who stepped outside of washington this last weekend or across at least a dozen states saw and breathed the very impact of wildfires and it may be canada now but it's gonna be one of our states next as of last week the federal government has already spent over three point three billion dollars in wildfire suppression this fiscal year even though the peak of fire season is august and september that's still ahead of us that should concern the committee we cannot allow wildfire suppression funding to run out before the end of the fiscal year so in addition to the long-term disaster recovery funding i urge the committee to examine the need for emergency suppression funds as well and i would note that the fire fix which has provided a steady resource for fighting wildfires will expire in fiscal year twenty twenty seven congress needs to extend and increase that funding to ensure firefighters have all the resources they need to respond to the ever-growing threat of wildfires i'll close by reiterating what i said at the outset disasters do not distinguish between red states and blue states and when it comes to disaster aid neither should congress so thank you again for holding this hearing and allowing me to be a voice for my constituents and for disaster survivors across the country. I look forward to working with this committee to ensure that everyone has the resources and the part that they need to recover and rebuild regardless of which state they call home. Thank you very much.
I appreciate the testimony of the entire panel, as we consider the supplemental, submitted by the administration your testimony is very helpful to us thank you i will now ask that our second panel of witnesses come forward
i shatter already
well leave it to our military witness to be on time
mmm
mmm sense when i'm right here
while we are waiting for our second panel to be seated Uh, let me introduce them. We are joined today by the secretary of war, Piet Hegset, the secretary of agriculture, Brooke Rollins, and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, General Dan Kane. These administration officials represent the largest components of the administration's requests and we welcome them to the committee today. Secretary Hexeth, we will begin with your testimony. Please proceed.
Well, Chair Collins, Vice Chair Murray, members of the Senate Committee on Appropriations, thank you for the opportunity to testify on President Trump's supplemental funding request for the Department of War. As you know, we live in a dangerous world that requires bold and swift action. Hence, this supplemental request for fiscal year twenty twenty six. this request is an urgent necessary injection of resources to address the immediate needs of our department the supplemental funding request is not a substitute
our our case is more of a case the other case is legal law this is against dronium people nineteen and twenty your hand or what uh fendantin america and uh and four hundred thousand
the witness will suspend until order is
oh my god
restored in the committee room. I know that individuals feel very passionately, but we must have order in the hearing room so that we can proceed. We're now gonna move forward to with our hearing, and Secretary Higgseth, please proceed.
Thank you. The supplemental funding request is not a substitute for the President's full one point five trillion dollar base budget request.
We're talking about our own lives.
One point five trillion.
Stop bombing our children in Iran and Palestine. This is illegal. We're talking about our own lives. Mister Secretary, please We're talking about our own lives. suspend until the order is restored in the hearing room. We're talking about our own lives. We're talking about our own lives. We will begin the timing clock, since you've been interrupted twice. We're talking about our own lives.
Thank you.
Please proceed.
One point five trillion is what the president seeks and what we need to defend the country. The members of this committee understand better than most that long-term, strategic dominance cannot be funded
The veterans offer
through one-off supplements.
Veterans offer engines more right now.
We will have order
Mm.
in the hearing room.
mister secretary please proceed
collectively the budget proposal submitted under president trump follow a simple logic
what is the purpose of what is the purpose of what is there is there lot of people literally died last day that didn't come in how come people not how come i would ask that the capitol police no but you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you whose professionalism i admire remove those who are seeking to disrupt please proceed
president trump's following a simple logic the military requires a generational investment to deliver on peace through strength we know the best way to create peace is to prepare for war to deter it and that's exactly what the department of war is doing building a force so capable that it wouldn't be absurd for anyone to challenge it as the direct result of neglected priorities in and gross negligence that ignored threats left over from the previous administration, President Trump inherited a set of global and domestic crises, deferred maintenance almost across the board. Instead of steering the ship through gathering storms, former leaders led our military language through social experiments and globalist appeasement, sheer weakness. Under President Trump, we have built a different type of department. The Pentagon is no longer run by bureaucrats, instead it's led by combat tested veterans and world class business leaders, who are running the department like a business, and tech titans who are bringing lethal innovation to the battlefield. We're also at a different moment, and we cannot afford inaction. If we don't make critical investments right now in tech, in compute, in AI, in autonomy, in space, our adversaries who are already making these types of investments could outpace us. Without these funds, we face critical shortfalls that threaten our ability to also simply pay our service members rapidly replenish equipment and munitions and sustain vital operations without disruption. This supplemental request serves two purposes. Sustain our military readiness to meet this year's new demands. and accelerate critical capabilities to replace and augment those we have used in contingencies. But make no mistake, this is not a one-for-one replacement. We are upgrading and we are modernizing across the force. On the readiness front, we requested twenty-one billion dollars. This will fund military pay, replace much of the equipment utilized during recent operations, sustain forward deployed forces, and grow personnel and strength while stabilizing mission critical shortfalls and supporting the National Guard. On the capabilities side, we requested forty six billion dollars. These funds will expand production lines and accelerate delivery of high demand munitions. We're talking about solid rocket motors, J DEMs, hypersonics, and counter drone capabilities. Additionally, we will use this investment to secure digital and space dominance, including resilient satellite networks. Department leadership recognizes that appropriating those funds is just the first step. Once funds are appropriated, or portioned, excuse me, to the department, we need to promptly execute on them. And that's why we're requesting targeted legislative authorities, like Transfer Authority, to prioritize our greatest needs and opportunities, Multi-Year Procurement for weapon systems, revolutionizing the speed and scale of munitions procurement, and New Start authorities. Rest assured that every dollar appropriated to the Department of War will be focused on building the lethality of our joint force and reinforcing peace through strength. As I have said before, not fully funding this department, the Department of War, and we know what that means, that that means one point five trillion, given the world that we live in and the disaster of what the Biden administration budgets gave us. Not funding this department at one point five trillion, I believe, is the greatest threat that our nation faces. Either we invest in our warriors at this moment of step change on the battlefield and growing threats, or this is all just talk. I look forward to working with this committee to secure those funds so that our war fighters can continue to do their work every day to keep our great republic safe. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mister Secretary, General Kane.
Chair Collins, uh Vice Chair Murray, distinguished members of this committee, I'm honored today to appear before you with Secretary Hegseth and Secretary Rollins to testify on the Department of War's fiscal twenty twenty-six supplemental funding request and I'll note I fondly remember my time at USDA earlier in my career, where I had the chance to serve there. I'm also joined today by my senior enlisted advisor, SEAC Dave Isom. As always, i'm deeply grateful for this committee's continued partnership and support for our common defense. i'd like to begin by expressing my deep condolences and that of the joint chiefs of staff and the siac for the fallen from this past weekend and their families. today we remember first lieutenant tyler fihann sergeant michael swinton and private isabel gonzalez and note that the names of our last fallen will be released when I'm humbled daily by the profound commitment of the incredible two point eight million Americans just like these names that I've just mentioned who make up our joint force and serve our nation every day. Also, on behalf of the joint force and the joint chiefs, I want to express my sincere and heartfelt condolences to the family of Senator Graham, for their loss, and all of you for the loss of your colleague. The joint force remains grateful for his forty-four years of service, both in and out of uniform. There is no doubt he made a difference to the safety and security of our nation. On July twenty-second, nineteen forty, General George C. Marshall said, and I quote, "For almost twenty years, we had all of the time and almost none of the money. Today we have all of the money and no time." His words resonate powerful powerfully with me today as we find ourselves in a somewhat similar situation. I've come to you today to request the necessary funds while in the window of opportunity, while time is still on our side. The United States of America faces a global list of military challenges. In the Middle East, in Europe, in the Pacific, both nuclear and non-nuclear challenges. and the continued threat of terrorism. We find ourselves living and leading in complex and dynamic times. Our adversaries are aligning in their interests, creating simultaneous challenges across multiple domains. They are sharing intelligence, combat capabilities and technology, technology that is accelerating the speed of war. Isn't it, it is an imperative that americas understand that the character of war is changing. Advances in technology are fundamentally and irreversibly changing the way we fight with which necessitates capital to properly arm america's military. Rapid advancements in ai autonomous systems deliver critical technological advantages to our national defense and simultaneously introduce unprecedented strategic vulnerabilities and uncertainty across the world, to include right here at home. The low barrier to entry created by affordable, ubiquitous, unmanned systems means our adversaries, rogue actors, state and non-state actors, and violent extremists have access to disruptive and potentially lethal technologies at scale. We've seen this in Ukraine and we must adopt elements of this fight for our future fights. Conflict is never confined neatly to the land, sea, or air domains. The modern battlefield stretches from the seabed up to cislunar space and beyond, cyberspace, and in the information domain, all at the same time. Our nation must be prepared to fight and win across all of them, all the time, all at once. In addition, the light speed at which information travels now has compressed our leaders' decision space, taking what was once days or weeks in World War Two down to milliseconds. Your joint force must be ready because the United States military is America's greatest insurance policy. And I acknowledge all of us find it difficult at times to pay for insurance before we need it. But we must have insurance before the storm comes. The armed forces of the United States of America serves as our nation's ultimate safeguard and our insurance policy to preserve, protect and defend our national interests, security and prosperity. To uphold this responsibility, we require predictable and consistent funding. This will allow us to partner effectively with our defense and national industrial bases, building on acquisition reforms that guarantee our war fighters' received capabilities, at scale before they are required in conflict or combat. I'm struck by this season of American history we find ourselves in, and I continue to ask myself, if not now, then when, and if not us in this room and the rest of the Congress and the nation, then who? I acknowledge the environment we all serve in, but always remember that we are all Americans with deep and abiding love of our nation, and our military service members and their families. I've come today to ask for your help and your support. America's armed forces need one point five trillion dollars to meet the military challenges of the future. This supplemental is a part of that, and to be allowed to use this capital to pay for military personnel, operations and maintenance expenses, and accelerate investments on critical technologies, as the secretary just mentioned. It is critical that we stay ahead of our adversaries, and we must have the funds before we're out of time. In closing, I ask all of us to remember our deployed service members around the world right now, especially our Army teammates who remained deployed after losing their friends and teammates this past weekend. And I again ask all of us here in the Senate and across the American people to never forget our fallen and their families, who continue to show us what courage, tenacity, grit and commitment to the nation looks like. Thank you very much and I look forward to your questions.
Thank you, General. Secretary Rollins.
Thank you so much, uh, Chairwoman Collins, Ranking Member Murray, and distinguished members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. Let me begin with the bottom line up front. The United States Department of Agriculture is joining today the United States Department of War in a fight for America. and for American flourishing. After all, defending America's ability to feed and fuel and clothe herself is defending America full stop. This can be easily forgotten. For centuries we built farms and ranches and transportation that fed not only America, but the world too. For a long time, that prosperity made America strong and made America safe. But across the past one hundred years, and especially across the last administration, we took that source of strength in war and peace, our farms and our ranches, and the communities that surrounded them, and we hollowed them out. We made them weak, and we put them on the precipice of decline and extinction. We sent our food production overseas. In fact, twenty twenty-three was for the first time a significant net importer of our food for America. And in so doing, we replaced American production with massive amounts of imports. We allowed and even encouraged the consolidation of agriculture, seed production, processing, fertilizer, and beyond into massive industries at scale. Today, nearly eighty-five percent of our meat packing capacity is controlled by just four companies. including two that are foreign owned. Additionally, our largest pork company in America is owned by a China company, or China. Four fertilizers in America now represent, four fertilizer companies now represent seventy-eight percent of the production versus just a couple of decades ago that was in the dozens. And two seed companies now produce more than fifty percent of the seed for America. These are national security implications. When President Trump returned to office, America's farm economy faced one of the most difficult economic environments in decades between twenty twenty and twenty twenty five the cost of seed rose nineteen percent crop protection rose thirty percent fertilizer rose over fifty percent fuel and oils rose nearly thirty three percent electricity thirty six percent and repair and maintenance twenty seven percent. As these costs climbed, commodity prices plummeted farm income fell by more than ninety billion dollars from twenty twenty three to twenty twenty four representing one of the largest single year declines in history at the same time producers saw not one new trade deal across the world resulting in an unprecedented fifty billion dollar agricultural trade deficit american farmers deserve better and our national security now demands it As long as we are beholden to foreign and even hostile countries for our fu food and our fuel, our freedom is in jeopardy. Since my first day at USDA, we have been committed to addressing this crisis head-on, in addition to implementing the historic working families tax cuts, thanks to uh so many in this room who worked so hard, moving forty billion in disaster and economic assistance to producers across the country, securing nineteen new trade deals, and decreasing that fifty billion dollar agricultural trade deficit in one year by forty-two percent. This year our corn exports are expected to be at a record-breaking thirty-five percent, ethanol up eleven percent, dairy up fifteen percent, and tree nuts up eleven percent. We are making progress, but we have a ways to go. Administrator Zeldin has secured the strongest renewable fuel standard volumes in history. and the President continues to support year-round E-fifteen for our domestic markets. We have led robust responses to animal health threats, including HPAI and the New World Screwworm, and have reduced unnecessary regulatory burdens and partnered with producers to strengthen the domestic demand for American agriculture. These are lasting reforms and will change the trajectory of American agriculture for the future. The trade agreements will take time to fully execute and generate even more exports. The biofuel investments take time to increase the demand for American crops, although we're already seeing a ten percent increase since just an announcement a month ago. And of course, on-shoring facilities like fertilizer will continue to take some time to build out. But we are confident that the direction of American agriculture is changing for the better. But many producers continue to face economic pressure as we build that economic infrastructure out. Specialty crop growers across the Northeast, the Mid-Atlanta, the Pacific Northwest and Florida suffered devastating freeze losses this past winter. Producers across the plains continue recovering from catastrophic wildfire and events occurring while many operations are still working to catch up financially. That is why our proposed uh proposal includes ten billion in temporary economic assistance for twenty twenty six row crop and specialty crop producers, and also includes one point one billion to help producers recover from catastrophic freeze losses suffered this past winter. Congress has taken similar action over many decades, and we're so grateful for that, but including most recently twenty twenty three and twenty twenty four with economic aid and disaster relief aid for the hurricane seasons. I want to be one hundred percent clear as I close, for the sake of American national security, American existence, and the American future. We must in the long run end this system that has grown up like a weed and strangled the American farmland in food production. Farmers want to farm for their products, not for a government check. They want to be free from dependency and free to innovate. We know what happens when they are able to do that. They build and feed the greatest republic in the history of man. But when they aren't, well, we know the danger that we are in today. But that's why this supplemental is so important. It provides a bridge and extends a hand to Americans who need it. It buys the nation the security that we need, and it buys us time to deconstruct and then reconstruct a new system, putting our farmers and ranchers first, and to restore the system that originally made America great. For our farmers, the defense of American freedom continues. They only ask to be free to fight. Thank you so much.
Thank you for your testimony. We will now begin with questions for our witnesses. As you can see, we have a very full attendance of committee members today. So I would ask that all of our colleagues to please keep track of the clock and stay within the allotted five minute question time. With that, let me begin. Secretary Hexeth, General Kane. Members on both side of the aisle have questions about the authorization strategy, objectives and conduct of operations in the Middle East. Regardless of our differing views, the fact remains that there are must-pay bills and urgent requirements facing the department that affect the ability of our military to deter and defend against potential aggression worldwide. Portions of the supplemental request go toward paying these bills, and are necessary to restore readiness, repair or replace battle damage to aircraft, ships or bases, and address urgent munitions challenges. I understand and I'm told that some military services face near-term solvency challenges. What will be the impact on our troops if additional funding is not provided? Are there military exercises, for example, that are at risk of cancellation? What message will we be sending to the world? secretary hegseth either you or senator or general kain
uh chairwoman i very much appreciate that question and it's uh cause it it's connected to the real world realities of this budget cycle uh there is training uh training right now and training in the future that would have to be curtailed if we do not get our budget needs met and met uh urgently and yes some of that has to do with the current budget cycle and how things how things come together but we are a department that for four years met funding shortfalls under the previous administration it was not a priority to fund the department of defense under under joe biden it also took the munitions and a lot of the the the there were five supplementals out of this committee that took munitions one for one and sent them to ukraine and had tried to replace them with the same bureaucratic process that was too slow and didn't replace them in real time and then there were threats that were ignored around the world so you're looking at a lot of negligence and a lot of uh deferred maintenance that this department is having to catch up on and so that's why i call this a generational investment it truly is this is one point five trillion dollar budget with this supplemental being part of it is how we catch up and get ahead uh and insure in the process we're putting soldiers and sailors and airmen first marines first guardians that their pay increases that the end strength increases that have gone up because recruiting is at historic levels fully funded. So rather than trying to play catch up and make sure we're not losing training, we should be ahead of that curve. And that's where we think one point five trillion can get us.
Thank you. Senator Kane, Senator, I keep calling you Senator, General Kane, I'm going to uh ask you to respond for the record because in my remaining time, I do wanna ask Secretary Rollins a question. Uh, Secretary Rollins, as we heard from the previous panel, Our country has many outstanding recovery needs from disasters and other related, weather related events over the past two years. As this chart shows, and this is a chart from your department, many have unmet weather related agricultural losses. In Maine, many of our producers are struggling, admit a combination of market. volatility and disaster conditions last year which included excessive rainfall in the spring followed by a severe drought they need relief yet the administration's supplemental request does not include funding to address these recovery needs it does have one point one billion to help florida agricultural producers rebound from a severe freeze this past winter but nothing for prior disasters in other states can you explain usa usda's thinking behind focusing your request just on the twenty twenty six freeze rather than on the twenty twenty five disaster declarations that you made
consider yeah
Yes, Senator, thank you for that question. Uh, the obviously the the discussions that went on over at OMB and with our teams continue. But what I will say is we are obviously one hundred uh percent in support of any sort of disaster relief program for our farmers, whether it's hurricane, uh, tornado, drought, freeze, et cetera. So look forward to working with you on that and specifically understanding the larger context here that Uh, there's a lot of farmers, a lot of producers who are really hurting, not just in Florida and not just from the freeze. So it's important that we work together to solve for that.
Thank you. Senator Murray.
Uh, thank you, Chair Collins. Secretary Higgs, Seth, um, your department received a hundred and fifty billion dollars last year in the Republicans' big beautiful bill. It also received a record eight hundred and thirty-nine billion for fiscal year twenty twenty six. more money than you asked for last year, combine that is a trillion dollar budget for the year, and as I already mentioned, your department has yet to spend half of the reconciliation funds. And despite that, you are here today asking for tens of billions of dollars more for things that you've already asked for in your FY twenty-seven request, or that have nothing to do with Iran. This administration has tried to sell this as an emergency request, but it may be better understood as an attempt to skirt the normal appropriations process. Here are just a few of the things requested in this IRAN supplemental. Eight hundred million for the National Guard to patrol DC even longer. Over one billion for the army to patrol the southern border, which is DHS's job. Nine hundred million to support the administration's illegal boat strikes in the Caribbean. Over eighteen billion for munitions, which you've already requested in your twenty seven budget request, and one point seven billion to pay for your decision to recruit more people than the services need which was not contemplated by the F Y twenty six funding bill Congress recently passed. Now you've already submitted a reprogramming request on this that our subcommittee is considering now which really underscores the point I made in my opening remarks that the problem's not a lack of money but poor planning. So I'll be blunt, the the truth is your request does not make a lot of sense. So let me ask you a simple question. Why exactly are billions of dollars more for the National Guard and this administration's illegal strikes in the Caribbean urgently needed for the Iran war?
Well, Senator, I wouldn't uh of course agree with your characterization, but why this kind of spending is needed is because of the gross negligence and neglect of the Biden administration inside our department. Ran it like a bureaucracy, uh, uh, abandoned, uh, our our our strength posture around the world. So we're having to reestablish deterrence. Uh, just took you mentioned the end strength numbers, and I will acknowledge that, uh, we are ahead of schedule on end strength in recruiting. Eight thousand in the Navy, six six thousand in the Army, four thousand in the Air Force. Because under President Trump there's been record and historic over thirty year recruiting records inside our department since he won the election because the
OK.
American people didn't wanna sign up for what Joe Biden was providing our military.
Well, let me, let me be blunt.
And they want to sign up for what President Trump is doing in his leadership. And so those are good problems to have that we need to fund and a reflection of of momentum.
OK.
And this budget will allow us to continue the kind of momentum that gets us ahead.
I, my, my point is that a lot of this request does not feel like an emergency. Let me move on. Secretary Haegst said, like most Americans, I've had a lot of trouble following this administration's contradictory statements about the war. On April eighth, you said, and I quote, Their missile program is functionally destroyed, launchers, production facilities and existing stockpiles depleted and decimated and almost completely ineffective. Mister Secretary, Iran has been firing at US militil- military bases in the region and its ships for the last week How is it possible if their capabilities were quote " functionally destroyed" three months earlier as you claimed for them to be doing this now?
Senator, Iran is at the militarily it has ever been in uh in the past decade certainly maybe in forty seven years as they've gathered effectively a terror army. And that terror army was built to try to create conventional capabilities
But
to defend against a pursuit of nuclear weapons which meant thousands of ballistic mis- missiles many of which we have destroyed others of which they have put inside facilities and hidden in underground facilities
But
and that's what terror regimes would do so I acknowledge they still have
But clearly
capabilities no doubt uh but the amount of the amount of damage that we've done to them over the course of this year has been tremendous. uh of the of these series of operations has put them in the worst place they've ever been.
OK, well let me move on. On May fifth you claimed that Iran doesn't control the strait, and you said that there was a quote "powerful red, white and blue dome over the strait". If that was true, how did Iran shrink ship traffic in the strait to trickle to a trickle again last week?
We pushed almost, I believe, between four hundred and five hundred million barrels of oil under the nose of Iran over the course of project freedom which went underground which i uh acknowledged after we did so covertly because it was more effective to do so quietly than to do so publicly so we've been uh in control of moving traffic through there for quite some time
but but it has
well they retained the ability to recklessly shoot at commercial shipping and that's what happened we had a ceasefire and then they shot at commercial shipping
well you uh also said at that same uh press conference and i'm gonna quote you
recklessly as a state that's what changed it
um you urged iran to quote let innocent ships pass freely these international waters belong to all nations, not to Iran to tax, toll or control. Last week, President Trump said the US would charge a twenty percent toll to each ship to pass through the state. So based on your opposition to p- tolls, did you talk to the the president out of that idea, or did someone else?
Um, Iran's not charging tolls and they're shooting at ships right now.
But, it, Trump said that he wanted to charge a twenty percent toll.
Uh, we we have a blockade right now of all Iranian ships and Iranian ports,
Yep.
It is.
It's excellent.
and uh, it's it's effective.
My time is up.
Senator Murkowski.
Thank you, Madam Chairman, and thank you all for for being here, um. Uh, challenging, challenging times. I think we all recognize that. Secretary Hegseth, I wanna ask, um, just specific to Iran authorization. Um, the administration has made the the case that the action in Iran falls under the article two authorities and we we can have uh disagreement, reasonable people can disagree about the boundaries of the presidential war powers um and have for a long period of time but I look at the war powers resolution and it's it's it's not ambiguous it requires the president to terminate hostilities within sixty days absent congressional authorization. So hostilities began February twenty eighth um uh May first Um, Congress was informed that hostilities had ended, but yet despite the fact that, that hostilities had ended, we were still seeing sailors being fired upon, um, uh, still activity. Then in June, uh, MOU is signed to preserve the cease-fire while negotiations continue that MOU has now collapsed. And we are seeing the, uh, resumed attacks in, in the streets of Hummus. On July ten, the administration sends Congress a new war powers notification effectively starting restarting, excuse me, the sixty day clock again. So, I'm concerned about this sequence because you have a situation where, uh, the claim essentially allows the president to extinguish the war powers clock, just at the moment that it becomes legally inconvenient through declaration of temporary cease-fire then it's reset, avoiding the congressional authorization that the constitution requires and the war power is intense so we had an opportunity in previous uh appropriations hearing for me to ask if you felt the administration had all the authority that it needed um you indicated at that time that no uh it additional authority was not needed are you are you still is the administration still taking that position about uh needing no authorization from Congress at this time.
Senator, I know there's a long um, long-standing legal legal debate on this particular topic, but we certainly as a department take the share the position of the White House that we have all the authorities necessary at this moment.
So, so let me just kind of do a follow on. Um, uh, in the Clinton administration, this is nineteen ninety nine, there was a a an operation that was launched, Operation Allied Force, NATO airstrikes against Yugoslavia. There was not um, a prior congressional authorization that was sought. Uh, President Clinaf- Clinton notified Congress under the war powers resolution, um, and then, uh, sent, uh, subsequent to that, sent Congress an emergency supplemental funding request. It was about six billion dollars to cover the cost of Kosovo operations. Congress then passed a supplemental package that rec- that covered the uh president's request plus additional military funding. But Congress never passed a stand-alone authorization for use of military force in in Kosovo. Uh when the war powers clock was set to run out then in in May of nineteen ninety nine, the the Clinton Justice uh Department's Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion holding that the supplemental appropriation itself, passed without any authorizing language, satisfied the War Powers Resolution requirement. So is the department looking to that or intending to rely on that same reasoning, that funding alone can substitute for explicit congressional authorization?
Senator, I I would uh I would have to defer to our to our legal department and we'll get back to you with our views on that but as of right now we think stand alone article two authorities exists for us to conduct this operation on behalf of the defense of the
In my remaining time, let me turn to you, uh, Secretary Rawlins. Um, I appreciate that you have acknowledged that fishermen are farmers of the sea. Um, I don't know whether you are aware whether any fishermen will be el eligible for any of this supplemental funding. They too have say face many of the same challenges that our farmers have with high fuel costs, uh the impact from tariffs, disasters, um that we have seen uh in the fifteen seconds remaining. Any help for our fishermen?
Well, I remember having the conversation with you when we were going through the process, and my commitment to you and to Senator Collins and some of our others on the across the aisle, was that it's time for USDA to recognize our fishermen as part of our farmers of the sea that's never happened before. We now have an office at USDA focused on fishermen. And so I think as you all move forward with the supplemental, the conversation, obviously up to you all what that looks like, but very supportive of treating our uh our fishermen similarly to the rest of our farmers. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Senator.
Thanks, Madam Chair. Mister Secretary, I'd like to ask you to help me reconcile some numbers. It's my understanding that this whole supplemental the funding request is eighty seven point six billion dollars and most of the funding sixty seven billion is for the department of defense yet we are told the department of defense still has seventy five billion in obligated funding from last year's reconciliation package is that true
um roughly correct numbers yes
so you left some change on the dresser before you uh prepared to come for this hearing what's gonna happen to that seventy five billion
Well that seventy-five is there's plans and designs on that, part of the rebuild of our military which had to be undertaken. And so the one big beautiful bill gave us specific avenues,
These specif-
but I'd have to get you the exact numbers of what that is left to be allocated.
Does it have to do with the war in Iran?
No, this is this is rebuilding our military from what was not funded in the past under the Biden administration. So that's these are this is from twenty twenty six, one big beautiful bill which which helped move the president's priorities like Golden Dome for America, move away from all the woke priorities of of what the Biden administration give us a chance to start cutting these deals on munitions,
Secretary, I
all the things that we he the president wanted us to focus on shipbuilding, hypersonics, I mean the Biden administration ignored hypersonics. They just decided to pretend like that technology didn't exist and we shouldn't invest in it. They're our thing. I I don't know what Lloyd Austin did for four years. I really don't.
Yeah, well I'm sure he
The amount of neglect,
I'm sure he has questions about what you're doing now.
the amount of stale thinking and bureaucracy,
May you proceed if I might before
it was staggering when we took over.
I interrupt your
So one big beautiful bill gave us a chance to get caught back up.
Let me interrupt your speech for a minute, Mister Secretary. it's my turn to ask questions. I've been listening patiently while you made your presentation. You estimated at one point that the cost of the war in Iran was twenty nine billion dollars, but then added a caveat that there was a replacement of munitions, for example. Do you have a new estimate about what the war has cost us so far in this, the fifth month of the first year of this war in Iran?
Uh, Senator, the estimate we have as of today is thirty seven point five billion.
And is the current activity which we've been told about, the exchange of fire back and forth, uh in Iran an indication that that number is gonna go up in the months ahead?
So, um, some of that number captures additional O and M mill pay and other that would be anticipate through the fiscal year so some of that anticipates what cost would be going out in the future as well.
So the new number you've given me is what?
Uh, thirty seven point five billion, seven.
And that represents the cost of the war through what period of time?
uh through now for certain aspects of it, uh but also meal pay, O and M, other anticipated costs through September thirtieth, Senator.
General Kane, let me ask you a question. I joined a group of Senators somewhere here, Senator Rounds, Senator Coons, Senator Shaheen, and met with President Zelensky in Turkey uh during the NATO summit. He was very explicit in terms of what he needed to win. He feels the momentum in Ukraine is moving to his side, that he is putting a foot forward instead of back. Is that your feeling?
Sir, I think uh the the pressure that Ukraine is putting on Russia is substantive at this point.
Do you acknowledge his request that we help them with air defenses as a high priority?
Sure, I know he's made the request, whether or not that moves forward is always a debate at our civilian leadership but i'm aware of that request
are you aware of the fact that we appropriated and the president signed into law four hundred billion dollars of supplemental funding for ukraine including money for air defenses
i am sure
are you also aware the administration has informed us that that money will not be available in many aspects until the next president is in office
sure i'm not aware of that my understanding uh my understanding was that that
no that's a fact
capital had been allocated but i'll have to defer to my civilian leadership on that
no i'm i'm sorry to tell you the pay plan tells us to be prepared to spend that money in fiscal year twenty nine the new president whoever it may be will make that decision if you're talking about air defenses and the momentum on side of zelenskyy what impact will it have if we cannot fund this for three years
sure i i i wanna highlight that the incredible work that the ukraine industrial base is doing is they scale their own capabilities it ranges from their surface to air capabilities to their air to air capabilities i'll note that recently we had the first air-to-air kill where ukrainian f-sixteen shot down a russian fighter so i think their ability to scale their layered defense has come along uh a long way over the past uh couple years with the help and assistance of many
General, thank you for your service to the country, and I'm sorry for our losses. I believe seventeen servicemen have given their lives in Iran so far, and hundreds, hundreds have been injured, and we should acknowledge that fact. And let me also say, we're at a moment in history where we can win the war in Ukraine. That victory would be critically important for those people who have fought for more than four years against the odds and proven, they can put Putin back on his heels. But instead of finding the money that they need now, for air defenses. We're putting more money into this exchange with Iran, a war of choice, which we never should have entered. Thank you, General.
Senator Moran.
Chairman uh Collins, thank you very much. Uh, let me first begin uh with just a statement to you uh, Secretary Rollins. Thank you for your leadership. Uh, thank you for your attention to disaster assistance. Hugely significant and important uh in uh in many states represented here, but across the country. And uh, it is as challenging circumstances as I've seen farmers in, uh, in my time and represent, rather, representing them in the uh, United States Congress. Uh, and I appreciate my colleague, Senator Rounds, for making that case today. I appreciate the efforts by Senator Bozeman, uh, the Chairman of the Ag Committee, and Senator Rounds and, and uh, his Vice Chairman Shaheen for their efforts here on this committee for that effort. Secretary Ha- Ha- Haegstaff, let me ask you uh, about your recent visit to the hundred and first airborne division, you saw the MV seventy five Cheyenne, uh you saw it first hand and heard from soldiers as I understand it about the next generation, capabilities, how they will transform the way we fight. Uh, the Cheyenne has broken through and it appears to me in the acquisition bureaucracy, uh to deliver a capability for our, war fighting, much faster than it otherwise would have happened. As you look across acquisition, I mean, we're here talking about appropriations, but the ultimate uh success we'll have in defending our country is putting that money to work as quickly as possible so as you look uh at acquisition, uh what would you tell me we learned from the Cheyenne? Is it a model how the department can uh it intends to field the next generation of capacity? Uh going forward, what does the program need uh from this committee uh to meet both the schedule and the necessity of uh its capabilities.
senator i appreciate the question i think it's in part one of the untold stories of our department is is how we've tried to revolutionize the speed and scale of new acquisitions and procurement some of it through munitions and ensuring that companies pay for building their own factories and their own assembly lines so that we're saving billions and billions as taxpayers while companies invest and when you invest in something with your own money you wanna see it succeed ahead of schedule and on time Also opening the aperture so it's not just the prime contractors that are competing, but new entrants who make uh high cost and low cost capabilities. I think in particular on the Cheyenne and and and, you know, the Black Hawk and the replacement, the gap that some have have identified could exist based on the hesitation on speed and replacement, is is uh exists because of an austerity mindset, again, that goes back to the Biden administration of divest to invest. and so you end up divesting in certain systems like the black hawk before the next one is online creating gaps for actual operators and what we're funding in this supplemental and across this budget is the ability to do both make sure the systems we rely on the battlefield right now are delivered and that newer entrance that we're gonna need for long range fight to deliver uh to be more survivable in contested environments which you're talking about when i had a chance to see it the the soldiers were proud to be in it because they felt like it would give them greater advantage in the future. We need to accelerate the timelines of those and deliver them even more quickly. Uh, and when you allow new entrants, with all the right incentives, those things happen, and it's happening in that program.
Will will that take place in, I think you maybe just said this, but will that will take place, uh, uh, in this circumstance, of the Cheyenne?
I believe in, in this administ because of the policies of this administration, it is likely to do so. Just like the B-twenty-one, just like the F-forty-seven, just like so many other of our exquisite munitions, that otherwise would have taken years and years to even get into development, we're moving those things left by, in some cases, years, so that we get them in the hands of war fighters who would need them right now, and not held up in bureaucracy in this town.
Uh, thank you, sir. Uh, let me turn to you, General Cain. Uh, the department is requesting significant supplemental to address the ongoing, uh, operational demands. Our adversaries are watching how we resource this moment. uh, Beijing, Moscow, Tehran, uh, are all increasingly coordinating their activities and intelligence. Uh, in your judgment, do you believe our adversaries view this moment as an opportunity to exploit US commitments elsewhere? And how does this supplemental ensure our deterrence posture and our commitments to allies remain credible in every theater all at once?
Well, sir, thanks for the question. In in my job, to look across the globe and look at the range of tradeoffs out there. Uh, we are the strongest military in the world. Our adversaries still fear America's ability to project power at the time and place of our choosing. Uh, there is no doubt that they are aligning, as I've said before. Um, and I think this supplemental and whatever funding structure, uh, the Congress working with the executive branch decides to structure and give us the capital, we'll use that capital to ensure that we sustain that.
You're assuring us that this uh supplemental and further efforts uh will reduce the risk to our nation and its national securities uh issues.
Yes, sir, I I I view this, and I've spoken to some of you uh on the phone uh leading up to this, I view this as future investments to buy down risk, similar to what I said Marshall thought through in those heady days in nineteen forty, where the need to invest capital early to deliver scale uh is uh is an opportunity that i hope uh i hope we don't miss senator
general thank you thank you chairwoman
senator reed
thank you uh madam chairman uh secretary ron i just wanna reiterate a point that uh senator Padilla made uh we have ten billion dollars in this request for midwestern farmers who are suffering because of the uh interruption of fuel and fertilizers uh because of the president trump's war unauthorized war uh yet uh many states blue states particularly have submitted requests where island has won february we had the worst snowstorm in our uh recent history uh and we've been denied by the president in fact if you look at the numbers twenty percent of blue states seem to get approved and about eighty percent of red states uh i'm making a point not asking a question this is unfair thank you Uh, Secretary Hexler, um, on February twenty eighth, when you initiated this war without authorization from Congress, the Strait of Hormuz was open and providing vital fuel supplies for the whole world. Now they're closed effectively, impacting globally the price of oil and the economies of the whole world. But the Department of Defense has been planning for potential operations against Iran for many many years. and one of their obvious assumptions was that the straight-ah-hor-moos could be close um were you unaware of that
uh senator you you are correct uh nobody plans more and looks at more contingencies than our department and so of course undertaking a historic effort like this of this scope and scale of course the straight-ah-hor-moos was front and center in every single aspect of that hence why one of our key objectives to begin was to uh sink the entirety of of uh iran's navy which its conventional navy was sunk now you can't get rid of every single fast boat and every single machine gun and a fast boat or every single uh coastal cruise missile so we acknowledge that if the state decided to become a terror state shooting at commercial shipping that would be an ongoing and contested part of the battle uh to include their willingness to mine international water so one side uh uh
so you're completely excuse me mrs. sector so you're completely aware that the strait of hamoos could be closed and obvious
weaponized the strait and we've been fighting back the entire time
has not affected their ability to effectively close the straits did
it we we had us boats that surrendered to iranian ships under the biden administration
did you in you on the
uh so their navy was affected in in expeditionary ways in the past
listen we're talking about the war you started not a situation in which oil was flowing freely there was no conflict we weren't losing uh personnel as a result of iranian actions so uh your fall back to the biden administration is just a very very um obvious uh excuse for what i think is probably as you described so often gross negligence you did not fully inform the president that you would be in a situation where the straight-up moves could be effectively closed oil prices could surge and effectively the iranians could maintain their ability to strike back as they are right now they just killed some of our service men last weekend um
this this battlefield and all the dynamics of it of which the chairman and i are responsible for ensuring the president
that
understands every branch and sequel of what could happen and we did
so it
the fact that those contingencies all were part of the possibility and we understood that is all the more reason why president trump deserves the kind of praise he should get for undertaking this having the courage to ensure
so
that crazy islamists can't have a nuclear weapon to hold us at issue and he's been willing to stay committed to that regardless of the challenges uh of this battle.
excuse me excuse me so he should be praised he should be praised for creating a war without authority creating a situation in which the world economy is suffering tremendously we have to ask extra money for our farmers and we have no uh outcome uh at least no real realistic outcome in sight yet let me switch to general kane general kane uh these airstrikes have not yet deterred and defeated the uh iranians do you think a airstrikes alone will do that
so i think academically as you look across the totality of history air power's got limits and we always have to be mindful of those i think where america's area of exclusivity is is when we bring the totality of the diplomatic informational economic and pair that with the military and there's a lot of that going on sir
well the military the next step would be escalation by ground combat do you anticipate that escal escalation
sir i i think it'd be unhelpful for me to opine on hypotheticals what i can tell you is we always develop an unbelievable amount of options and the associated risks and then my main job is to always ensure that leaders understand those options and the risks
now if you employ ground troops to seize objectives which i would assume be the first stage are you prepared for an extended guerrilla war which would likely happen in that area
sir i with all due respect i think it'd be unhelpful for me to opine on hypothetical situations on whatever decisions the president may or may not take in the future
have you advised the president that uh uh ground combat would be very expensive in the lives of our soldiers sailors marines airmen and also could probably lead to an extended uh uh unconventional war in that area i don't see the iranians sort of throwing the hands of saying you know welcome to iran
uh senator i always advise the president on a range of military options and all of the risks that are contained within that but i have to keep my military advice to the president private sir
but well thank you
Thank you, sir.
S- Senator Hoven.
Thank you, Madam Chair, Secretary Rollins. Uh, I wanna thank President Trump and I wanna thank you for including farm bridge assistance in this supplemental request. I know I've worked very hard to get it included. I know you have worked very hard to get it included. And I wanna thank you and your whole department for your work on it, and for this vital support of our farmers and ranchers. What I wanna ask you about, though, is actually crop insurance, the number one risk management tool that our farmers have is crop insurance. And the uh buy-up option is critically important. It covers sixty seven million acres, sixty seven million acres of farmland in this country. It uh it was uh decommissioned and we need to get reinstated. Again, you and I both worked very hard on this. Please update me on where we are in terms of getting that buy-up option for crop insurance reinstated.
We are one hundred percent supportive of that and are moving forward to execute that buy-up option. Uh, thank you for your leadership on that, Senator.
Thank thank you for your support. Also, secretary uh, assistant secretary Ford is for his uh,
Yeah.
support. Um, it it's very impactful, very important, and will make a big difference for our farmers right now. So thank you for that.
Thank you.
Secretary Hegseth. Um. Are Russia and China uh, helping Iran. And if so, how?
Well, Senator, as the Chairman alluded to, there's definitely adversary alignment, uh, uh, attempts to do so, uh, and there are many ways that we, uh, deter that, some of which are, uh, and, and the depth and extent of it ought to remain classified and it should. But there are ways in which both of those countries are, uh, limiting, uh, at different levels, uh, enabling some of the things Iran is doing. Yes.
General Kane, would you like to add?
Sir, I'd rather um not opine on the specifics because that would divulge what we know, and I never want the adversary to know what I know. I just wanna know it.
And hopefully we'll get a chance to do that in the skiff.
Yes, sir. Yes, sir.
Um.
Happy to happy to do that in the skiff, sir.
This, so, this relates both uh to the funding but also again to how we achieve our objectives uh with iran uh starting with you secretary can we get to the point and and we're seeing continued i think improvement and progress on this but essentially where we can where and hopefully our allies will they need to step in there with us but where we get to the point where we can uh operate in a straight or a moose but keep iran blockaded we're continuing to get better at that but that's how we they'll never do anything that they say they're gonna do. They've proven that over and over. We have to keep the pressure on. But if we can do that effectively, we keep the pressure on and achieve our objectives. Tell us where we are in getting that accomplished.
Senator, I think that's uh a really good point. That's effectively what we did to create the pressure that led uh to the circumstances of the MOU which was a we're running that running a route where ships, and we did it covertly uh in cooperation with Gulf countries and others who were willing to take uh take some of the risk with our protection. and then maintain the blockade. So effectively, oil is coming in and out, oil prices are coming down, but our blockade is staying and the pressure is mounting on Iran. That's something we have done and can continue to do.
Right.
We moved into an MOU where Iran said we won't shoot at shipping. And then they turned, the IRGC turned around and decided to start shooting at commercial shipping again. At which point the president, I mean, as he should, cannot tolerate that. And so we respond, as he said ten times. Uh, you shoot at ships, we're gonna shoot at you overwhelmingly, which we have been doing now. uh, for, i believe it's in tenth consecutive uh evening. So consequences come with the willingness to shoot at commercial shipping. Our blockade has been reimposed and is effectively impenetrable. We we've uh we mount we got seized a ship inside the uh Arabian Gulf as well. Uh, so there's a lot of different angles to it. A lot of levers we can pull. And ultimately, uh, a lot of the strikes that Admiral Cooper and CENTCOM have been undertaking, are taking Iran's ability to see and sense away in the Strait of Hormuz, which has uh, tactical benefits for us.
And that's what this funding is about. This funding is about making sure that we and our allies can operate in the Strait of Hormuz, which helps bring down energy prices for every single American consumer, and that we force Iran to meet our objectives. Isn't that what this package is all about?
This is a peace through strength package.
Right on.
That's what one point five trillion has always been about, a generational investment at a, as the chairman alluded to, a step change moment. we need to be able to do it at speed, at scale, with autonomy, with ai, with high, with exquisite, high cost and low cost, to be ahead and get, stay ahead, so that you're not just able to do what we need to do in the state of Hormuz, but deter adversaries like Russia and China from getting involved in future contingencies.
And just general Kane for any follow-up that you would like on that issue.
Sorry, I wouldn't have anything to add.
OK. Again, thank you and thank you to all of our men and women in uniform, we appreciate them so much.
Senator Shahin.
Thank you, Madam Chair, Secretary Hegsath, since you last testified before this committee, we finally received the spend plan for the four hundred million FY twenty-six appropriation for Ukraine's security assistance. This funding was passed back in January, and now there are only three months left in this fiscal year. And while I appreciate that we now see what most of the funding is intended for, I just heard from the CEO of one of the manufacturers of the defense articles that are contained in the spin plan that they not only haven't received funding but they haven't even seen a contract so when are we gonna see a contract for those defense articles that are contained in the spin plan for Iraq or or I'm sorry for Ukraine.
For Ukraine. Uh uh uh Senator I'll have to get back to you on the specifics of the time line of that I'll talk to our policy shop as well
Well, you've told this committee that you've barely spent half of the hundred and fifty billion in reconciliation funding. And if you still have seventy-five billion available, why are you asking the American people to absorb the cost of a war they don't support, instead of asking for transfer authority for unspent reconciliation funding? Especially if you can't even get four hundred million dollars in Ukraine funding out the door.
Um, as I mentioned earlier, Senator, that money from the one big beautiful bill is otherwise allocated to the rebuilding of our military with priorities of the president like Golden Dome for America and hypersonics and other munitions investments that we made up front as we tried to adjust the Biden budget budget into an America first budget and so reallocating that away from those priorities is Rob and Peter to pay Paul those are allocated to rebuild and ultimately we're
But but but my point is if you can't if you can't spend it on a timeline that
committed to this year's agenda.
makes sense why do you need to come back and ask for more money wouldn't it be better to spend money that you already have and one of the things i noted was or at least i think that this supplemental doesn't include funding to repair damage to our bases or to our military infrastructure in the region and i have not heard that we've gotten the full extent of any of those damage estimates so should we expect another request to address that uh military construction costs and at what point do you stop asking americans to foot the bill for a war they don't support on top of an inflated budget um request and billions in reconciliation funds that you still haven't spent
well senator i obviously don't agree with your characterization of that uh but ultimately
i i appreciate that but you didn't ask me but i want you to answer my question i know you don't agree with my characterization i don't agree with yours either
well i one of the reason i i i take issue with that characterization is something that senator durbin said when he talked about ukraine and he talked about winning and i appreciate as much as anybody winning a war but i sit in front of a committee that wants to talk about winning a war that's been going on for four years and talks about strategic defeat of a conflict that's been going on for four month months to prevent iran from getting a nuclear bomb i want i i i would hope for some perspective in this town of the historic nature of what president trump is undertaking Do you want radical Islamists to have an entire bomb that could scare down the world?
I I don't want I don't want to hear your speech because I have limited time.
I I don't understand.
So, you you can't answer my question, then I will move on to my next question. Secretary Rollins, the timber industry has also been hard hit, as you know, by trade wars, by drought, by wildfires, by other natural disasters that are increasingly common. Um, in New Hampshire, which is the second most heavily forested state in the nation, The th- one of the things that we really need, as you know, because we've had this conversation, is a research program and forest service staffing on the ground, um, in a variety of ways, but particularly at Bartlett Experimental Forest. Um, these small investments in research and staffing and sound management help make the forest economies healthier and more competitive. I very much appreciate your having staff visit Bartlett last week with my staff and with staff from the governor's office. But can you commit to restoring staffing at Bartlett and to keeping the facilities there open, now that you've seen um the critical nature of that research?
Timber.
Why don't I follow up with you? I have not gotten a report from their visit, so I would like to do that first, but obviously you and I have been in a continuing conversation about that. The good news, there's no doubt our timber industry is in distress and has been for a long time. The fact that we import ninety percent or something from other countries of our lumber needs is crazy. We're changing that. But the good news, we had more board feet sold last year than any time in thirty years. This year we're gonna exceed that target again. So we're making the right moves on this, but there's no doubt that research is important to that, as we've discussed. And uh I'll follow up with our team and then we'll we'll uh reconnect.
Thank you, I appreciate that. As you pointed out, research is critical to ensuring that the timber economy continues be successful. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Kennedy.
Tha- thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you all for being here today. Uh, General, in in the war between Russia and Ukraine, who do we want to win?
Uh, sure, I want I want Ukraine to win.
Is Russia our America's friend?
i'm sorry sir i couldn't quite hear your question
is russia america's friend
uh i i think that depends on your definition of friend i think it's a complicated relationship but no i don't think they're our friends
thank you if we could cut off russia's cash flow which suspend which depends substantially on its sale of oil. Would that help Ukraine win?
So I think militarily any time you can restrict uh resources and cash flows against uh an adversary
General, I ha- I have so much respect for you,
that's a good thing. Yes, sir.
but I have so little time.
Yes, sir. I'll try to be briefer.
Could you just give me succinct answers?
Yes, sir. It would it would assist a uh
But help wouldn't
Yes, sir. Yes, sir.
OK. Um. If we could stop people, entities and countries from buying Russia's oil, that would help cut off its cash flow, wouldn't it?
Yes, sir.
We have a bill to do that, as I'm sure you're aware. We have the votes today to pass it. overwhelmingly. I have also have enormous respect and admiration for our Majority Leader, Senator Thune. But I hope everybody on this panel will today contact Senator Thune and ask him to bring that bill to the floor. we should vote on it at a minimum of next week. Some of my colleagues, General, want America to just stop in Iran. In the blockade, bring all of our our our warriors home. What would be the consequences of that in your estimation?
sir i think uh termination criteria is always a political decision however i assess that uh iran will continue to be a challenge moving forward so we have to
yeah
uh be thoughtful about that
will they put tolls on the straight
i don't know sir that's a decision that's a hypothetical will depend on what happens in the future
it's not hypothetical we've got a blockade to stop them
we do sir that's putting economic pressure on us
general i want you to look maybe i i'm not asking you for i'm not trying to get you in trouble i know your advice to the president he is uh it is is private but this is serious as four heart attacks and a stroke now what happens if we come home and end the blockade to the world
sure iran uh has the potential to continue to be a threat And we're we will need to prepare military options to do that.
W- will they toll the straight?
I, sir, that's a hypothetical question and I don't know the answer to that.
Oh, it's not hypothetical. You come we come home. It's not gonna be hypothetical. You know that, General. And I do too. And and I I appreciate your discretion. But we're down to it. We need some hard answers and some straight talk. What'll happen, Pete?
senator i would i would agree with the chairman but the likely outcome is they would try to impose their will on the on the waterways in ways that uh that would
would they toll it
the world would not like call it a toll call it a fee call it an exchange call it control they would do something that they would try to hold it at issue yes sir
would they would they try to uh to to redevelop to uh commence development again of a nuclear warhead
um part of the reason president trump had to have the courage to do what he did after midnight hammer that they didn't give up their ambitions even though their nuclear sites had been obliterated. So this is a regime hell-bent on nuclear ambitions, and President Trump's been willing to go after them.
Guys, we need straight answers. We need straight answers. Do we have the ability to destroy whatever is underneath Pickaxe Mountain?
A lot of, Senator, a lot of our capabilities are classified, but if anybody in the world can reach anything on this, on God's given, God's green earth, it's the United States military, the most powerful military in the world. It's all about options and trade-offs.
All right. I'm gonna take a little extra time, cuz others got it, Madam Chair, I won't abuse it. Secretary, uh, are are shrimpers farmers?
Absolutely, yes, they're farmers of the sea.
Are are are oyster harvesters farmers?
Yes, in this USDA, yes.
Are are they having to compete with other countries who grow oysters and shrimp in a ditch? and shoot them full of full of antibiotics?
One hundred percent, yes.
And if you eat too much of that foreign foreign shrimp and oysters, you'll grow an extra ear, won't you?
I'm not sure about that, but I know it is not good. And I also know we import ninety percent of our shrimp.
Why aren't we inspecting the the shrimp and the oysters from abroad?
Well, it goes much larger than that. Why are we importing so much from abroad, which goes to the president's trade agenda.
I'm in big trouble. yes you are guys look we need straight answers now we're down to it senator merkeley
oh thank you madam chair and secretary rollins i appreciate your partnership on addressing several issues in oregon and i sent you information about a couple others and you responded uh appreciate it we'll follow up on the research service we'll follow up on the concern about in kind contributions uh uh serving as a as a as a match but i particularly uh need your help on the fire funding and i know you've indicated how and how important that is where we stand now is that uh the senate seems hamstrung that they're seeking to have omb give them a number on that uh various sources say the number is probably about five billion i don't really care if it's four point five or five or five point five. The point is that folks here, senators, are asking for a number from OMB in order to go forward. And when we're looking at the fires right now, and my home state's the epicenter of of the highest risk in the in the in the country. So can we get your help to get that number and move this process?
Yes, absolutely. It is a paramount importance, especially in the middle of fire season right now.
Thank you. Thank you so much.
Thank you.
And Chairman uh, Kane, Uh, the um, I, I think there was a, uh, a sense that the, the President expressed at the start of the war, uh, that the US military power was overwhelming and would likely produce unconditional surrender quickly by, by Iran. Uh, and that obviously hasn't happened. Was it your opinion as, as well? Did you feel like the, the, our military force could produce an, an unconditional surrender in quick order?
Sir, I won't uh I I with due respect I won't share my private advice to the President. What I will assure you and the American people is I always speak truth to power and offer um an accurate assessment of what my assessment is of both our readiness, the plans and activities that might be undertaken, the associated risks, and the secondary and tertiary considerations that go with those opinions or options.
Uh, thank you. So you feel like the various risks, that the Iran would close the, could possibly close the strait, even despite the destruction of their navy, that the possibility of assassinating their political leaders and their military leaders could produce a strengthened hard line and weaken the reformers, that uh, Iran would have the ability to sustain its ability to attack sites throughout the Middle East, that uh, the initial requirements of the war could surely deplete our uh basically high-end stand-off munitions that uh this could affect our our relations with our allies. All those were factors well considered in this decision to go to war.
Sir, I'll as I said, I won't opine on or share my private advice to the president.
Yeah, I'm not asking about your advice present, I'm asking you. Did you understand these issues or have these become revelations as the war has unfolded?
Sir, my job is to understand all of the considerations go into the carefully considered use of military power.
Let me ask you this then.
Um, yes sir.
I I understand why you don't wanna respond, but these are these are all massive risks that seem to be poorly weighed in the in the beginning of this uh misadventure. Um, currently there are reports that we have hit the Bonjee desalination plant, uh that provides water to about twenty villages, or about ten thousand people, and we also damaged the desalination plant at Keshem island. Uh, were these deliberate uh targets by the United States?
So I'm not aware of those as being particular targets, nor am I aware of those reports, and I'll have to go back and get back to you on that.
If you could, I'd appreciate that, you are aware that infrastructure that civilians rely on to survive is not generally considered legitimate military targets?
So as you know, we have a robust process which considers a target, that goes through a system that looks at a variety of considerations to include what you're alluding to around. both purely civilian or dual use targets.
Great.
I have trust and confidence in CENTCOM uh that they're looking at the range of those things on a daily basis.
You're, it sounds like you are assuring us that we will, the United States, not target, even in retaliatory sense, uh infrastructure that is generally considered to be primarily for civilian survival.
So uh as I mentioned we have a robust process and uh you know we have the most professional military force in the world that follows the law,
It'd just be nice to have you say yes, because this is international law,
that follows the law. Yes, sir, that follows the law.
if you understand the international law.
I do, sir. I've got a lot of lawyers that help me understand it.
OK. Thank thank you.
Yes, sir.
Uh, and you'll, will you get back to us on that question of whether we targeted the excelination plants,
Yes, sir. Of course. Yes, sir.
and if so,
Of course.
uh, if if so, why? Um, my time's up, but I do want to express, uh, encouragement to look at what the negotiators forward or uh advisors as to whether a ten day break could facilitate returning to dialogue that might find a path forward.
Senator Hytes-Smith.
Thank you.
Thank you Madam Chairman, and I want to thank all three of you for being here today. I am gonna direct my first question to Secretary Rollins and again, I want to commend you publicly for the outstanding job you're doing at USDA. You know, this is my world. As former Ag Commissioner, I hear from a lot of producers in Mississippi, and they are so pleased with your performance. And, uh, that is just truly genuine right there. But, uh, I'm pleased to see the administration's supplemental request as for ag producers because, uh, before I comment on that, I just want the entire committee and administration to take note of the tremendous timber losses as well in places like Mississippi. due to winter storms and the tornadoes we've had there it is significant and i certainly look forward to working with you uh with the uh concerns of the timber sector regarding the supplemental you know our row crop producers as you've mentioned in your opening remarks uh they are truly in a serious situation i've talked to multi-generation farmers back home who are the best of the best that did not even plant this year because they could not make the numbers work. And producers in Mississippi and nationwide, you know, we continue to face these economic conditions. They're not going away any time, immediately or soon, but we've seen the commodity prices drop and the uh input costs just go through the roof. If we want the next generation to stay on the land, Congress we're going to have to take this opportunity to provide this critical market assistance for our farmers and enact policies that build structural demands for commodities like the Buy American Cotton Act, that uh, year-round E-fifteen, all of which would make the paths better, more favorable for these producers going forward. But I appreciate the administration's effort to this date, including the farmer bridge assistance program that was so valuable, implementation of the updated farm safety net with working families tax cut act, and now the supplemental request before Congress. But will you speak to why it's critical for Congress to act swiftly to pass this supplemental and the need for us to pass legislation that drives the demand for farmers' products.
Yes, thank you, Senator, for your kind words. Uh, a couple of really important points. Number one, as we work to open the markets around the world and we're seeing, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, uh, just extraordinary numbers, that fifty billion dollar agricultural deficit we inherited a year and a half ago, is now down into the twenty-ish billion. We expect it to go down significantly this year. Uh, again, the highest price we've seen in over a year in corn is today, in soybeans is today, et cetera. Your point, Senator, about opening up the domestic markets is really important, whether that's E fifteen, renewable fuel standards, obviously the RVOs came out, which is a reason for the drive-up, uh, in some of our road crop prices in the last month, which is really important. But also, as I mentioned, bringing the cost of inputs down, we are expanding fertilizer, the largest ammonia plant we're gonna break ground in Louisiana in two weeks, reshoring, bringing back to America real fertilizer production. And then also the long term, we, we gotta figure out how we're, we are doing these supplementals and these bridge payments, which we have to do for these farmers to survive. But what we're seeing is just survival. And we're seeing a lot of the input companies, equipment, seed, fertilizer, make record profit. So we've gotta be able to dig into that as well. But as of today, ensuring that we can keep these farmers farming while we're opening the markets, while we're bringing down the cost of inputs is paramount for a secure America. And that's why this is so important today.
Thank you. Very very much for that. And Secretary Haegsel, thank you for being here in the amazing job that you're doing. I have the utmost respect for you, your team, and what you're accomplishing. But I as well am committed to ensuring that our war fighters have all the tools necessary to accomplish the mission in Iran and whatever else that they need to defend our nation's interest. The supplemental request is in line with that goal and I'd like to shift my conversation right now quickly to ship building, which is extremely important to the state of Mississippi and our country's ability to protect itself. The President's FY twenty twenty-seven budget requests funding for one DDG fifty-one while Navy leaders have said their goal remains to build two destroyers a year. And at the same time, the department is exploring options for using allied and overseas fabrication in future naval construction, which raises questions about the long-term role of the American Naval Industrial Base for shifting work away from domestic ship builders. Shipyards like Ingalls in Mississippi, which I would love to invite you down to there. It is amazing and the thousands of suppliers and small businesses they support, they need the confidence that the work will be there so they can invest in new facilities, hire and train skiers,
Um, you just you just made the case for this generational investment. Because of the underinvestment, Senator, in shipbuilding in the previous administration, just static, flat, bureaucratic, slow, uh, we're having to revitalize that industry, and one DDG is a reflection of a backlog in capability. So as we ramp on more ca- capacity, those numbers of DDG's, the workhorse of our Navy will go up as we grow that force.
The senator's time has expired.
Thank you.
Senator Coons.
Thank you, Chairman Collins, Ranking uh Member Murray. Um, thank you, Secretary Hegseth, Secretary Rollins, uh, General Cain for your service. Um, I wanna start with the things I know we agree on. Uh, we agree that we should honor our fallen. That we should stop and remember them. and console and comfort their families. That we should be mindful uh of the hundreds of Americans uh who have been wounded and injured uh in this war in Iran. General Kane, your observations about how our adversaries are aligning more and more closely, technology is accelerating, and cheap and lethal and easily accessible drones pose greater and greater risks to our troops, our homeland and our security. And Secretary Hegseth, uh, that we need to protect our troops wherever our president directs them, that we need to protect our partners and allies, and that the dangerous radical Iranian regime should never possess a nuclear weapon. I think we agree on all of these core basic points. Where I think we may disagree is on this supplemental and on the strategic choices made to achieve some of these core goals. We're a hundred and forty-three days uh into a war with Iran, a war of choice that we started with Israel, but did not include, consult, or incorporate our core allies. our NATO allies, our regional allies, the American people, and Congress. And the reason to consult and include our allies, and Congress, and the American people, is so that when the costs and the length of a war extend beyond what we'd initially imagined, the American people and their representatives in Congress understand that sacrifice and can continue to support it. I think your first strategic mistake was to not consult the American people in Congress and make a clear case for the reasons behind this war. There have been many, lots offered. And I think our military has executed on the core missions. Attacked ballistic missile sites, sink the blue water navy, um, attacked their proxies, constrained their capacity. But I frankly think it was entirely foreseeable that Iran would close the Strait of Hormuz, would use cheap, lethal, widely available Shahed drones that they've led the world in manufacturing to attack our bases, our troops, our partners and allies and impose real costs, higher costs in fertilizer, in fuel, higher costs for the world, and tragically, increasingly higher human costs for us and for our troops. So, two questions, uh, two general lines of questioning, if I could. Uh, Mister Secretary, your question says without these supplemental funds, we will face critical shortfalls that threaten our ability to pay our service members and sustain global operations without disruption. you've been asked repeatedly there's seventy five billion dollars, appropriated but unobligated. Can we really not avoid critical short-term shortfalls? What does that mean about the budget management within the department in terms of unexpected and um unbudgeted wars? Uh, first Operation Southern Spear and then um Operation Epic Fury.
I wou- I would just note, uh, I was sort of updated, ninety five percent of the one big beautiful bill of funding will be allocated by the end of September, in a in accordance with congressional intent. So these are things we are we we we said we would spend, and we told you we would spend them on, and we plan to spend them on those things by the end of September. So this is a new request based on new realities of of of of a world we face, stepping up to meet that moment. Uh, and and ultimately
And forgive me, Mister Secretary, but that that's news to me, um, that that seventy five billion will be out the door, appropriated, uh, uh, sorry, allocated and spent. by september and i was simply questioning how we have um ships running out of fuel in the open seas and planes being grounded and
i i didn't say ships were running out of fuel in open seas or planes were grounded i'm saying we're gonna have to make tradeoffs
training machines but the operations and maintenance accounts are running out of money
uh everything our troops need on the battlefield they're they're getting in spades and beyond uh it's ultimately looking into the future can we invest above and beyond that the types of munitions fast enough as we upgrade and modernize our our force That's what's at issue here in this one point five trillion,
Yes.
this supplemental, and any other additional funding that comes.
Two quite different things, a one point five trillion dollar uh base budget request and a now um seventy six billion a dollar supplemental. And I was simply gonna point to A, Department of Homeland Security is sitting on nearly a hundred billion uh in unobligated funds you haven't requested reimbursement for the millions of, uh, frankly billions of dollars the department has spent
on law enforcement. Second,
We
um, requested a reimbursement and are getting a substantial reimbursement from DHS. That's good news and that's news to me. Um, and, and frankly, as we reflect on the service and sacrifice of those, um, who put their lives on the line of this war, one of the things I've raised over and over and over is the ways in which this administration has dragged its feet on partnering with Ukraine in order to deploy
best in class sensors, detectors, and counter drone systems to protect everything from Dover Air Force Base, to our bases in the region, to our troops, to our partners. I want to see you focus on accelerating the defense of our troops and our nation. Focus on accelerating the defense of our troops and this region, and a strategy that has a real chance at succeeding at the goals that we agree on. Cuz the strategy followed I think has no credible likelihood of success.
Senator Brett.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Appreciate all of you being here today. Um, so, since the beginning of the, um,
I'm not like that.
Putin's aggression into Ukraine, this body has passed five supplemental bills, funding different portions of that war. You mentioned in your opening, Mister Secretary, about not getting those munitions that had come through this body quick enough to Ukraine and also being able to replenish those here at home. Can you talk a little bit more about that? Because I remember the previous administration dragging its feet after this body gave them directive as to what to do so can you shed a little bit more light as to what you were talking about in your opening?
Well, thank you for that question. I sometimes we forget recent history which which under the bide administration there were five supplemental requests for ukraine uh which almost every member of this body voted for to to send rapidly in a bipartisan fashion for something that
mmm
this committee and and the administration deemed to be urgent uh uh we president trump may take a different view but that was the view of the bide administration here
and and real quick wouldn't you say it would be urgent to make sure that our men and women in uniform right now have everything that they need
i would argue providing for american men and women as opposed to ukrainian men and women is a higher priority for the united states senate uh so five supplementals that went to ukraine as good as that cause may be why is that righteous to do but funding troops in harm's way right now uh uh given the threat and what they're undertaking this is a partisan exercise it's hypocrisy and i appreciate you pointing it out
and so mister secretary real quick um uh madam secretary question for you when the russia ukraine war started we saw obviously cost go up around the world. In particular in that region, we know that supplying of fertilizer w- you know, was tremendous. We also know Ukraine was top five when it came to wheat and corn and other things that we utilize um you know across across the globe um uh it's my it's my recollection that uh fertilizer went up about fifty-five percent. Obviously, if we were able to create stability there in the region and have peace, it would it would follow that then prices would likely go down over time within the agriculture world as well. Is that is that fair?
Yes, that's correct.
OK. And when we're looking at the Ukraine and Russia war and um trying to end Putin's aggression, trying to bring peace, General Kane, if we were to cut off the funding that Russia was getting, would it follow that that would be a driver that could possibly lead Putin to the table.
Sarah, yes, and their economy is struggling now.
Thank you. Thank you. And we also know, I saw reports this weekend, that it is said that possibly Russia and China, which I know you can't comment on right now, but are actually helping Iran, whether it is targeting our troops, funding and other mechanisms, so a thing that we could all agree that ending that would be helpful. I wanna just uh echo Senator Kennedy's comments that I think the sooner we can get this bill on the floor and passed, um it would be it'd be huge with regards to Russian sanctions. Um also wanna just talk briefly about the dysfunction of this body. So my question is for you, Mister Secretary, and you, General Kane. I would have to think that our adversaries, and I believe that we need to fully fund our military, making sure that our warfighter is the best ready, trained and equipped across the planet. I think we have an obligation and a duty to not only meet the needs of the moment, but to also look at what's to come and be preparing for that. You talked about an insurance policy, you talked about what we need to do. Then now is the time to do those things. But I would have to think that the dysfunction of this body, whether it's the full shutdown, a partial shutdown, a partial shutdown, not being able to pass NDAA, not being able to pass FISA, I would have to think that our adversaries look at that and it gives them a little bit more uh credence as to what they're doing abroad can either one of you comment on that
thank you senator that's why i have said and i will continue to say that the inability to properly fund this department the department of war is probably the single greatest threat our nation faces whether or not we will make a generational investment in not just winning the wars currently but deterring the wars of the future given the step change in technology of this moment and the underfunding of the previous administration you meant you didn't mention continued resolutions which is a whole another way our department has has eh foolishly budgeted so i appreciate you highlighting that it's very true
yeah and and and general k question for you obviously a shutdown is just is is a terrible thing for the department of war and the men and women that you oversee but i would assume that a a cr is not much better can you comment on the effects of that
ma'am the department's done a lot of work to bind together founders funders and fighters as we look to the challenges that we face in the future and a cr would hurt badly the effort to properly arm the joint force
i hope we can work together to do the right thing thanks the people are depending on it
senator schatz
thank you chair thank you secretaries and uh general for being here i want to start by paying my respects to first lieutenant tyler of eva beach hawaii who was among those killed in Jordan this weekend while serving our country. His courage, selfless dedication and unwavering commitment to duty reflect the very best of our armed forces. We extend our deepest condolences to his family, his loved ones, his fellow service members, and remain forever grateful for his sacrifice. Secretary, about a hundred and ninety thousand people in the state of Hawaii, believe it or not, voted for Donald John Trump, and I know a lot of them and I represent all of them. And one of the reasons that they were enthusiastic about Donald Trump and you, Minister Secretary, was they they thought that we were gonna have a new foreign policy. And that I think, I'm paraphrasing, but I think you characterized yourself as a reformed neocon or some such thing. And people were pretty thrilled about the idea that we were going to that America first in their mind meant that we were gonna not do this kind of adventurism. And so I I don't want you to answer me, I want you to answer them. And I wanna walk through the sort of stated objectives of this war at the outset. Regime change. We now have a younger and more radical regime. depleting, eliminating their conventional missile capability, it's true that we've depleted their conventional missile capability. It's also true that anything the Department of War sets out to do, it usually succeeds at. So the question is not do we kick ass? It's when do we decide to use kinetic engagement to extend our power across the globe? And it's clear that Iran's retains enough conventional missile capability to attack our bases and our interests in the region. Now, it's true that the Blue Water Navy is destroyed, it's also true, and you know this, that the IRGC has something that you may not call a navy, but it's got capabilities to to touch us with drones and missiles and lay mines in the Strait of Hormuz. Preventing their nuclear capability, it's also true that if you bomb the crap out of a place, they're gonna have less capabilities by the end of it, but it's also true that we have not eliminated their nuclear capability, and whatever duration we've set them back actually pales in comparison to the, and I'll say it, the Obama nuclear deal which we did without having to put our people in harm's way. And then the last objective, which has become a new objective, is open up the Strait of Hormuz, but the Strait of Hormuz was open before this war started. And so you tell my constituents why this war is going so well.
Uh, I think you did accurately portray me as a reformed neocon and members of our generation in Iraq and Afghanistan watched administrations on both sides try to project some remaking of a society in in the image of America that spent thousands of lives I mean in Iraq. um, you know, fifteen, I don't, I don't know the exact number, but tens of thousands between Iraq and Afghanistan, men and women lost. President Trump said we're not fighting stupid wars like that again. And he hasn't. That's why we haven't been trying to remake Iranian society, but simply in a realist America first way, ensure they never have a path to a nuclear bomb full stop. And he has said as a candidate, and he said for, as a private citizen, Iran can never have a nuclear weapon, cuz radical Islamists with nuclear weapon will wield it over our head in perpetuity.
Secretary, I
So President Trump ran on fighting wars differently and were doing so overwhelmingly. And he was very clear as a candidate that Iran can never have a nuclear capability.
Yeah,
So I think he's directly on par with exactly what he's saying.
let me just, let me get a, let me get a question back in here. Um, I think we're, I think we're understanding the limits of air power here. Because we're basically at a stalemate. You s- someone says the state of her her moves is closed and we say, well, we're, we got a naval blockade. and we're just gonna see who blinks first and the truth is in order to sorta change the balance here change the equation here some kind of escalation would have to be considered and if you're taking that off the table then we are in a holding pattern and i go back to the original five objectives and none of them have been have been met some of them have changed but none of them have been met and with gas at now four O two the brent crude hit ninety today up from seventy two weeks ago gas up about a buck nationwide about a buck fifty in the state of hawaii people want to know why are we even doing this
senator pizzer
because
go ahead
thank you madam chair secretary hagg seth i appreciated your perspective on the focus on the four year war in comparison to a four month war with a nuclear adversary and i thought it was very well said thank you uh if we if we want to support ukraine going forward i think the best way to do that is to dramatically increase munition production and we need more interceptors we have to be able to move forward so so do our allies and our friends and let me emphasize that this supplemental does that this is what we're talking about here today it's one of the things that we're talking about as a member of the armed services committee one of my priorities for over five years now has been on munition production uh general kane what happens if congress doesn't fund this twenty one billion dollar request for additional munitions.
well ma'am there's there's been a lot of work done by the department to partner with the private sector i'll acknowledge some of the efforts that the private sector is doing to utilize their own capital to facilitate factories if we don't um as a team uh figure out how to properly fund uh the department then uh you know we're not gonna get the munitions and there's gonna be a lack of shared risk between the federal government and the private sector and i think we're at a point in time in our history where we need to partner we need to find an ability to share risk we need to be better sellers and buyers on both sides in order to make sure that the young all volunteer force has the weapons that they need before uh they're asked to go do something
what you're saying is we need to be prepared as a country
yes ma'am and i i i hope as i said in my opening statement that we will find a way uh to make sure that we seize this moment in its time in history uh to ensure that we've got the right mix of munitions high low scale autonomous
what's what's your plan b if the supplemental doesn't pass what's plan b
ma'am we we will always figure things out we will always have contingencies we will always uh uh determine a way to create multiple simultaneous dilemmas for adversaries around the world in order to create time for us to do the work that the congress and the department needs to do together
as you've heard me say a number of times in uh our posture hearings on armed services and also in classified briefings uh we don't have a lot of time do we sir
no ma'am that's why i said if not now then when and if not us then who and i truly believe we're at one of those moments in history where we have a choice to make just given what i see on the next couple ridgelines um and i i encourage us to move forward
thank you uh mister secretary how would this request scale munitions production and be able to accelerate our delivery times
in the past previous administrations would sort of send the same amount of dollars into trying to encourage companies to build another factory and add an additional shift what this munition request does is fulfills deals that our department have with these companies first multi-year procurement where these these companies that make sm threes or patriots or thads or tomahawks you'd
was a priority for uh our ndaa a couple of years ago when we put that in
absolutely and you have provided that authority multi-year procurement and now those companies are spending four billion dollars five billion dollars three billion dollars on building their own new factories that then produce two x three x or four x the amount of munitions than they did in the past and they paid for it so actually in this budget which is twenty one million billion as you mentioned it saves eighteen billion over the five dip on munitions because we're buying munitions at today's cost and not at five or seven years from now when we will also get them
well i hate to interrupt but we're running out of time we also have the the request includes uh four point one billion for our space base capabilities and that includes the amti and our space data uh network capabilities and these really underpin the long-range kill chains and allow our war fighters to detect and also then to attract to track the airborne threats so mister secretary what's the risk to the joint force if we delay these programs until fy twenty eight or beyond
um senator not being able to see not being able to sense before an adversary is able to engage one of our capabilities and which means falling behind in the domain of
great thank you and general kane do you have anything to add on that about why congress can't wait i think you make such an excellent uh case on that
no ma'am i'll i'll stick with the words that i that i offered
secretary rollins thank you for your folks on year-round sale of v fifteen for taking care of uh the horrible disasters we've had in nebraska we appreciate you coming out And um, I have a couple things more, of course, that I wanna bring to your attention, but thank you very much. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Van Hollen.
Uh, thank you, uh, Madam Chair. Secretary Rollins, uh, the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center in Maryland is one of the crown jewels of agricultural research in the United States and my question is simple. Can we find some time to get together in the coming weeks to discuss the situation there?
Absolutely, yes.
Th- thank you, Madam Secretary.
Yes.
Uh, let me, let me turn to the, the Iran war. Uh, we recently lost three American heroes. That brings the death toll for American soldiers to eighteen. One is still missing. Hundreds have been injured. That's on top of the civilian death toll throughout the region that now stands at several thousand, including the over a hundred and people killed in the bombing of an elementary school in Minab in Iran. Meanwhile, the Strait of Hormuz is closed. Gas prices today in the United States again spiked above four dollars a gallon. And that will also continue to push up costs for groceries and other things that that families buy. Secretary Hexseth, uh, you said in your opening statement the best way to ensure peace is to prepare for war. And I agree with you about deterrence. I would also submit that the best way to ensure peace is not to start wars, because wars are a lot easier to start than they are to end. General Kane, I heard your testimony saying Iran will continue to be a challenge. And I think it's pretty clear that that is in fact the case. And, General, I, in order for you to develop a military strategy, to accomplish a particular objective. You obviously need to know what those objectives are, right?
Y- yes, sir, it all it all starts with um uh what what is the political objective and from that we derive military objectives that support uh whatever that end state is.
A- and as you say, that is a a political objective.
Yes, sir.
So, Mister Secretary, you've talked a lot about winning. Talked about winning in your testimony today. You've talked about winning throughout the Iran war. And we all like winning. But I think the American people to deserve a definition of what it means to win in Iran. Because this war has dragged out for a lot longer than certainly the president of the United States indicated. Indeed, the president said on march twenty fourth and i'm quoting we've won this war this war has been won do you know what the president meant by that back in march
well senator i would just note uh militarily i mean iran has been completely overmatched and and and crushed from the beginning militarily their capabilities are nowhere near ours i would take issue with with your characterization that we didn't start that we started this war Iran started this war forty seven years ago and they've killed thousands of Americans,
Uh, Mister Secretary,
including our brothers on the battlefield in Iraq.
all, with all,
So, Iran has been targeting us for a long time.
with, with all respect, Mister Secretary, Mister Secretary,
We didn't start it, they didn't.
let me, let me just ask you this, since you said that what the President meant by his statement on March twenty fourth, I think that we had sort of defeated Iran militarily. But that is not the entire objective. of this war. I don't think there was ever a question about whether United States with its superior military could destroy a lot of Iranian assets, military assets or other assets. That was never a question. But when most people think of winning the war, they think that that means the war is gonna come to an end because we've won. And the president said back in March that we'd won. So, I guess my question to you is, how are we going to define winning? I hear back in March, you said about the Iranians and I quote, whether they will have a ceremony in Tehran square and surrender, that's up to them. So my question, Mr. Secretary, reopening the Strait of Hormuz is necessary in order for us to win, right? That's just a simple yes or no question.
You asked me what the overarching objective is, and I would say ensuring Iran never has a nuclear weapon. That's been clear from the president from day one. That's why Midnight Hammer was undertaken, to obliterate their nuclear sites. That's why we're watching their nuclear sites. That's why that was a part of negotiations. Ensuring that the next generation of Americans don't have to deal with an uh Iran that wields a nuclear weapon.
Since that's what you're leading with, Mister Secretary, let me let me just say this. You said after Midnight Hammer, and I'm quoting, " Our bombing campaign obliterated Iran's ability to create nuclear weapons." Clearly that is not the case based on your testimony today. It's also a fact that the DNI, Tulsi Gabbard, testified in front of the Intelligence Committee that it was our assessment that Iran did not intend to restart its nuclear program. The president of the United States just about a week ago said, " Iran has committed not to develop a nuclear weapon," which of course is a commitment they've made for many years, we need to inf- force that that's what we are doing under the jcpoa thank you madam chair
senator browns
thank you thank you madam chair uh i had the opportunity to serve as governor of south dakota for eight years during that time we deployed over five thousand young men and women into harm's way national guard members from south dakota i attended their uh departure ceremonies um i attended their welcome home ceremonies and i attended thirty one funerals one of the main reasons that i decided to come to washington was because i never wanted to see young men and women going into harm's way again if they didn't have the best leadership the best training and the best equipment possible now this body the senate with regard to the iranian war to date this body has chosen not to impose war power limitations on the president Nor have we pushed for the withdrawal of forces from the theater. I think the decision to take out Iran's nuclear program and their missile production capacity was the right one. And it should have been done a long time ago. But when the president did that, we also assumed that there would be risk involved. And when you put young men and women in harm's way, you wanna do everything you can to make sure that you get in you get the job done and you get out i think that's what we talk about now today it has been since february that we now have the iranians that are shooting back we haven't finished the job i think the question that the american people have is when the difficult decision comes because i don't think diplomacy is necessarily working and i think most people would say we've got more issues in front of us before this is complete. For General Kane, when the time comes and the President is asking for the decisions about the options available to him to appropriately end this war favorable to the United States and to take care of this problem permanently, are you prepared to provide him with the appropriate options that he is gonna have to make a decision to choose from
so i always provide the president with appropriate options and risks that he can choose from
and those options that he will have to choose from will cost money and that's our role here because if we don't do it right young men and women die
yes
my question to you sir is this
yes sir
you've offered a supplemental request and i recognize that it's part of a one point five trillion overall but is this enough money to get the job done or is this gonna just get us far enough until we've gotta come back in here and in the meantime we may very well not have these young men and women out of harm's way yet that's my question
sure i wanna first uh uh start with recognizing your thirty one fallen from home and mourn their their losses uh we carefully consider the use of military force every single day. And the most important thing that I do is make sure that the president and the other leaders understand the risks and carefully consider the Dover test, a place you've been many times. And that is, are we willing to go to Dover as we will tomorrow to bring back the fallen.
So.
I can't answer the question on what it will cost because the enemy has a vote. Um, what I'll commit to you as this plays out, uh, we'll make sure that the Congress is informed, but because I'm not. quite sure how this is gonna play out yet it would be unwise for me to comment on what a future cost may or may not be depending on what they choose
j- then in general you will provide a plan to congress at whatever the appropriate classification level is on what resources are required to execute what the president's intent will be to successfully end this conflict
sure i will i will always make sure that as we have to that we're moving data as appropriate to congress yes sir
let me come back in just in terms of follow-up on this little bit um some of the criticized operation epic fury for expending many of our munition stockpiles were our munitions the inventories of those munitions and the capacity of our munitions industrial base sufficient for great power competition with near pure adversaries like china prior to operation epic fury secretary hegseff
senator as i laid out because the previous administration short funding shortfalls munitions transferred to ukraine and not replaced and then ignoring threats it built a lot of risk that required that requires this kind of investment so you look at the sixty seven billion alongside the remainder for one point five that's the kind of generational investment that not just matches peer adversaries near but far surpasses them which i think is your expectation having been to those ceremonies which is mine having been to them and going to them so we give everything possible to the warfighter that they they deserve
senator heimrich
thank you madam chair
thank you
thank you madam chair uh general kane um our military is the best in the world and so i don't think any of us should be surprised uh with the technical execution of its attacks on the Iranian regime's forces. They've been flawless. Um, I, what I don't want us to confuse is flawless technical execution with long-term strategic success. And I think one objective that is relatively modest, cuz it puts us back to where we were when we started this, but none the nonetheless is incredibly important as a critical objective, is that I wanna see the straight open again and i wanna see it open where shippers can transit that straight without being extorted by iran uh and i would love to see that before our commercial and other oil reserves are exhausted because of the impacts that that will then have on the pocketbooks of american families is that a reasonable objective and is one is it one that you share
so i'll defer on the military objectives to the political leaders who set them um what i can tell you is us central command is working hard to ensure that iran cannot uh terrorize the southern flank down there and they are doing so uh every single day and night and you and the rest of the senate would be proud of the actions and activities for the forces that are down there the character of war is changing though like i said in my opening statement and so there is a variety of mixed munitions that are down there coming at the uh the commercial traffic but i would like to be clear and unambiguous with you and the rest of the senate and the iranian uh forces they have a choice to make and they should knock it off
um i have no doubt i would be incredibly proud of uh the actions of our service members in this conflict and uh i hope we can achieve that kind of strategic objection on the timeline that that obviously um avoids the worst impacts of uh the limitations of of commercial oil supplies right now uh secretary rollins i wanna shift gears um one of the things that you mentioned in your opening statement that we appear to agree on is that there is simply too much consolidation in a number of agricultural sectors you mentioned fertilizer and seeds but in particular i wanna talk about the meat packing industry because in a previous trump administration bailout about ninety million dollars went to the corrupt Brazilian meat packer JBS. I think that Congress really intended those funds to go to American ranchers. So, I wanna ask you what are you going to do this time around to ensure that the proposed relief dollars that we're talking about today, uh, that those funds go to American producers, instead of to the very foreign corporations who have created the business model, where ranchers bear the risk and meat packers reap the profits profits.
Well, that's right, and we're obviously at a seventy-five year herd low. Uh, there are a lot of reasons for that, but, um, working to solve for that. Number one, the Department of Justice is investigating right now significantly the four, but especially the two foreign owned. Number two, USDA is investing significant funds in deconsolidating packing and supporting uh mid-sized and smaller packers, around the country. I know that wasn't your question, but just to to to answer the uh the bigger question which is a really important one. But from my perspective what the Trump USDA two point O has been hyper focused on small and mid-sized farmers and ranchers. Uh, we have worked really hard on the forty billion that has already moved through, to make sure that that goes to where it is intended, which is not multinational foreign agricultural corporations.
I um, I very much support the efforts of the Department of Justice. I think there is a very important um antitrust case to be made here. Um, at the same time I've watched as your department has rescinded three important rules that were put in place to protect farmers and ranchers from unfair practices by the large meatpackers. Those rules were supported by the American Farm Bureau and the National Farmers Union. Explain that discrepancy to me.
Which rules? i'm not tracking
the uh the inclusive competition and market integrity rule the transparency and poultry grower con contracting and tournaments rule and the poultry grower payment systems and capital improvement systems rules
the packers and stockyards uh i think is what you're talking about so we are um executing an additional review on that i think that the point is very well made that sometimes that inures to the benefit of the larger corporations as i have begun to make a larger case and a more um vigorous case in the importance of deconsolidation we'll be taking a second look at that. And I would love your input.
Right. And I would very much support deconsolidation.
Mm-hmm.
Thank you.
Senator Huston.
Thank you, Chair Collins. Uh, thank you all for being here today. Uh, in my brief time in the Senate I've learned that uh we're really good at embracing our oversight role, but oftentimes there are many people who don't wanna uh do their jobs in terms of funding the government on time and actually doing the work that we're supposed to do as appropriators and um i'm not for blank checks believe everybody should be accountable but i also believe we should do our job and now we have a a a supplemental funding request that we're discussing today we're waiting on getting an nda done uh i despite the chair's best best efforts to facilitate forward an appropriations process. There's question of whether that will get done on time, uh, in September. And, um, my question, start with you, Secretary Heggseth, just to talk a little bit about what the consequences of failure, what this really means, to not do this on time, because I've talked to defense contractors. I, uh, uh, as a former executive, a member of an executive branch, I know that the legislative branch often thinks, " Well, no matter when we get this done, we just wave a magic wand, we pass the bill, and it all magically happens. But that's not how it happens. It takes time for people to, you've businesses out there who are gonna rely on to build these weapon systems who don't know if they're gonna get paid. They, they can't plan. They can't, they can't staff up, they can't order the equipment, they can't do any of these things unless they know that the money is actually coming. So what are the consequences of not just doing this but doing it on time, in a timely manner?
Senator, thank you. I think the consequences of dysfunction in funding this department, uh, put at risk a I I I think a first time in twenty-five, thirty year reform effort to change how we do business as a department. We're we're going to war with the Pentagon bureaucracy because the the bureaucracy existed to defend just a few s- few comp, uh, few systems and processes and companies. We need all of American industry coming into our department. And if you talk to Industry. They've never seen anything like what our Deputy Secretary and our department are doing right now to run fast at speed. But it counts on this body and others funding this department in a way that can fulfill the deals that we're cutting that saves the taxpayer tens of billions of dollars and gets weapons to war fighters years and years faster than we ever have in the past. So without the funding, we put at issue all those deals, all the reforms, all the ways in which we're changing our department to move at the speed of business. So, it it's not just dollars and cents it's demand it's predictability it's showing industry we will meet you at this moment and if we can't get past our dysfunction to fund the warfighter we put a lot of that at issue
general kane uh same same question from military point of view not knowing if when the funding's going to come and us not doing our job on time what are the consequences to the warfighter
sure i'll just add to the secretary s comments you know it will manifest itself in a range of ways uh readiness capability munitions uh training uh cyber uh unmanned autonomy um i i this is why i am really asking for the congress s help here for us to look forward at the next couple ridge lines and to be thoughtful about the moves that we make here and i understand the environment that we are operating in right now um but um whatever structure uh the legislature and the and the executive branch determine we need predictable predictable capital my investor had on for my previous life uh so that we can go out and procure the capabilities that we need before we need them and the and and those things are changing um you know the advancement of of small drones and things like that we're gonna have to make sure that we stay very close with the congress so that as technology develops at a speed that we haven't seen before, that we're staying very close in partnering with the Congress to enable us to adaptively use that capital with the appropriators' buy-in, so that we're arming the force properly.
Well, I can, I can tell you in interacting with the people who are the, that wanna build these new generation of weapons systems, cuz, cuz I think you would agree that we've learned a lot from Ukraine. We've learned a lot from this conflict. about how we were underprepared uh eh from this standpoint and and uh uh from a defense standpoint and that we we have to continue to modernize our system the weapon systems think it's very important that we not only do our job but we do it on time because it you cannot
yes sir
run a department of defense uh run businesses who are supplying these things without knowing if you're actually gonna get funded the whole supply chain, the workforce, everything gets held up when we don't get our jobs done on time.
That's right.
So, so.
Yes sir, I used to, I used to work in the private sector for a company that was headquartered in Pickwell, Ohio. And those leaders told me, your entire JOB, Dan Cain, is to deliver quality parts, or in this case, weapons, on time, with shorter lead times and lower costs. And part of why I'm so passionate about this is because I see how this capital, if the Congress chooses to give it to us, will manifest itself in real combat capability, lethality, and survivability for our joint force.
Mm.
Thank you and thank you, Secretary Rollins, for coming to Ohio meeting with all of our ag leaders. It was great.
It was great.
Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
Senator Gillip, go ahead.
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. Secretary Hegseth, um, you're requesting billions of dollars in supplemental funding for a war that you said would last for weeks, and that the president has no plan or ability to end. At the same time, this still unauthorized and extremely unpopular war has caused gas, diesel, fertilizer, and other essentials that New Yorkers and our farmers need across the country, and has become much more expensive. So how do I go back to New York, and what would you say to them, who are seeing their health care bills rise because massive cuts to Medicaid. They've seen their grocery and gas bills rise. And this unpopular and unauthorized war abroad is a higher priority to this administration than their ability to feed their families and provide health care, to their loved ones who are sick.
Well, Senator, you're you're talking about political tradeoffs and our job is to to to deliver for the United States military and the president of the United States. And we we look at the cost of a nuclear Iran, and we wanna prevent that for future generations. And that requires funding and supplementals and this budget and next-generation capabilities and that's why we're here today, to request some of that to insure we can insure that Iran never gets a nuclear weapon.
So you're essentially saying, you're asking for literally one point five trillion dollars for a war that President Trump said he already won. You're asking for one point five trillion dollars, unlimited money for bombs, but insufficient money in the American for the American people for their health care their food their housing and our farmers secretary Rollins who we have cut snap program we are not funding the losses from uh emergencies that have happened in blue states particularly where we had frost
that's not true that's not true
false false you're not funding it but back to you secretary Hegseff
and i would like to respond to the fertilizer and the gas
you continue have your chance Secretary Hegseth,
There's no reason to be rude.
you are you are asking for unlimited money for bombs when people can't feed their families. And I don't know how this administration intends to defend those decisions to the American people.
Um, not unlimited bombs, Senator. I'm asking for the right bombs at the right time to ensure we can deter our adversaries into the future. And that's why this is a generational investment.
OK, but see, Mister He- Secretary Hegseth,
And it was the previous administration who didn't fund this department.
the reason why people are so upset, the reason why they are so upset with you and this administration
They didn't fund it.
is because the words you have used in the past don't add up. About Iran specifically, you said that we had obliterated quote-unquote Iran's ability to create nuclear weapons. The president made the same claim claim. Yet eight months later in February of twenty twenty six, the president launched an act of war claiming Iran was within two weeks of having a weapon. So when you say two very different things, the American people don't know who to believe or what to believe. They just know they can't afford their health care, They can't afford their food, they can't afford housing, and our farmers are continuing to suffer. So, which is true? Was it obliterated or wasn't it? What what's the status?
The nuclear sites under Mid-Dyed Hammer were obliterated, but Iranians foolishly continued to attempt to pursue nuclear capabilities, which is why we destroyed their defense industrial base and also many
OK,
of their other capabilities to ensure they can't get to a nuclear weapon.
then, then, that's just OK.
See, we're staying laser focused on the objective. and you're trying to make campaign commercials.
No, we're not.
And that's fine.
So listen to this. You also say that you made the, um, missile program, quote, destroyed and made combat ineffective, quote, Iran's entire ballistic missile production capacity, every company that builds every component of those missiles has been functionally defeated and destroyed and that the missile program, existing stockpiles were depleted and decimated, almost completely ineffective. So why are there missiles left to hit Jordan and result in the loss of life of our brave men and women.
As we stated from the beginning, the Iranian defense industrial base is effectively gone, but they do have underground facilities facilities because they're the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism, and they've spent forty seven years trying to hide their missiles under mountains just like their just like their nuclear capabilities,
Thank you, mister, thank you, thank you, sir.
cuz they would like to get a nuclear weapon to wield it against us.
Just don't know what version of the war to believe, because it's either over or it's not over, it's within two weeks or it's not two weeks, We have no missiles or we have missiles. And that consternation is why so many New Yorkers are perplexed, stressed out, and find this war to be incredibly unpopular, cuz they don't understand the choices that the president's making. They don't agree with those choices. Secretary Rollins, so you have cut over a hundred and sixty thousand New Yorkers have been kicked off SNAP. What do you have against hardworking New Yorkers, children who need SNAP, and seniors who need SNAP?
Well, first of all, diesel is down under Biden versus today, five eighty one versus four eighty. Gas is down from Biden today from four eighty four to three eighty six today.
Fact that it's over
Fertilizer is down fifty six percent from Biden highs.
Prices are higher than when you took office.
So this narrative that you are using, well
All of those prices are higher than when you took office. So you are not making life better for New York farmers.
That is not true. That is not true, Senator, and let me tell you what New York is stressed out about, is the fact that your state is taking prime farmland and turning it into a solar farms that is absolutely inexcusable for you to stay visit the new york farmers you will see that smart farms do both do both i have visited the new york farmers two times two times in upstate new york
this senator's time has expired thank you
uh thank you madam chair very much and uh thank all of you all for your service to our country and our national security and i think it's easy for the public to understand how you uh mister hagseth or you know your contribution in the position you're in in general kind of position you're in but uh some don't understand uh the position that uh our secretary of agriculture is in i gave a presentation a couple of years ago when senator rubio then senator rubio was over here in the middle of it i was talking about agriculture he punched me and said john always tell them food security is national security now senator cotton who's head of the intelligence committee now has taken his place he's doing the same thing so again uh what we're talking about today is very very important to our country um right now we're in a generational crisis uh our banks our economists tell us that if we don't start doing things differently and the good news is is the administration is doing thing differently uh is doing things differently we're gonna lose twenty twenty five percent of our farmers in next two or three years uh i'm visit almost daily with farmers about the difficult farm economy uh wildfires flooding all the things we've talked about today my only concern is is that the supplemental is very much appreciated uh after hearing the testimony today and the concerns uh we might need to to look at bumping that up a little bit But again, that's, we'll, we'll discuss that later. Uh, the, the supplemental though, the supplemental assistance is important in keeping our farmers going, but it's not the answer. We just reiterate again what we're trying to do, we're trying to give farmers a, a bump, an edge to keep going until the programs that we're putting in place now kick in. You mentioned fertilizer, you mentioned E fifteen. you mentioned value adding our products, uh, both overseas, finding new markets, can you talk a little bit about that, the importance of not only the supplemental but again, uh, what we're doing in conjunction with that so we won't have supplementals in the future.
That's exactly right, the effort to bring the cost of inputs down is real, uh, fertilizer, seed, labor, um, interest rates, et cetera, number one, and if we can just get inputs back down to where they were in Trump one, we're gonna have a remarkable recovery in farm company country. But then you add that to the nineteen new trade deals, more coming online every day, the record-breaking exports uh that we're gonna see in a lot of our row crops, but also in dairy and tree nuts and others, that's gonna be a game-changer. Then you look at expanding the domestic market as you talk about whether E fifteen, uh obviously all of the biofuels, we've already seen corn and wheat hit record highs or are the highest number for the year. after announcing the new renewable fuel standards. So, we're seeing some pretty incredible movement in the right direction. Then you marry that to all of your work under the Working Families Tax Cut Act, the new reference prices that under the last administration couldn't get a farm bill. You all did that with the president's leadership, the first time we're gonna increase reference prices in more than a decade, combined with a two hundred and fifty billion investment in rural America, the largest investment in rural America in American history. this congress did that with the white house's leadership all of that together is going to change the trajectory for the long term of farming and ranching in america but to get to that point that's why this supplemental is so very very important
uh madam secretary i have a a letter from farm bureau that i wanna put into the record that just outlines uh requesting relief to sustain america's farmers and ranchers um uh secretary hagseth uh general kane uh one of the things that we're concerned about is that uh in the military construction aspect of things we're really not asking for that in uh in the supplemental i i know that uh uh the success of operation epic fury uh particularly for our missile interceptors and short range aircraft uh really uh basing was a large part of that can you tell us how we can help you again try and uh plus up our military construction uh in some way so that we're not gonna be faced with this in the future you know trying to double up
senator i think by congress finding the ability to meet uh up to close to uh the totality of one point five trillion means we're not making the kind of tradeoffs this department has made now for decades Those are the types of things, construction, maintenance, that fall off when trade-offs occur. And so you dig the hole even deeper. And what this budget does, it first of all, it fully funds the upper list, which is the unfunded priority list of Paycom, uh, a priority theater, and then it gets at every single substandard barrack that we have across the department. Uh, so we're we're funding the mil- military construction in a way that we've never done before to to get out of the hole that we've had for a while.
Very good. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Senator Bozeman. To the very patient, Senator Baldwin.
Thank you, uh, Madam Chair and Madam Vice Chair. Um, and thank you for appearing before our committee today. Um. To many I represent and to me, this supplemental request is another example of this administration's misplaced priorities. instead of spending tens of billion dollars more for this president's war of choice in Iran that both houses of Congress, I may add, have voted to end absent explicit authorization by Congress. We should be focusing on the needs of American families. We could invest this money to accelerate new cures and treatments for cancer and Alzheimer's. We could use it to help more families with rising home energy costs. We could use this funding to help more families afford quality child care. We could use this funding to help more kids get free school lunch. We could use this funding to restore health care for working families. We could use this funding to support our public schools and special education. This is a war of choice. And every dollar spent on this war is a dollar not spent helping families afford housing, health care, groceries, child care, at home, investing in the opportunities for the American people. First, I want to express my condolences and my respect for the seventeen American service members killed in this war since February. including three over the past few days. Their lives are the price this country has paid for this war. The deadliest day for US forces was on March first, when an Iranian drone struck an army facility at Port Shwaiba, Kuwait, killing six soldiers and injuring more than thirty others, including soldiers from Wisconsin. The soldiers from the unit stationed at Port Chueva told reporters that the facility did not have adequate air defense capabilities. These soldiers and their families believe they were sent into harm's way without the defenses they needed. Secretary Hegseth, what would you say to those soldiers and their families?
first of all that we uh honor their and recognize their sacrifice and what they've given i've been in touch with at least one of those families on a regular basis and understand the the pain of losing a loved one is unfathomable uh which is why we we greeted them at dover and will greet those again uh tomorrow i would say in in talking to admiral cooper the sent calm commander before all of this was undertaken maximizing defensive capabilities mostly by moving as many people as possible off X, which we did in historic fashion, moving almost ninety percent of Americans in theaters off of where they could be a target, first of all,
So I wanna focus fully in on for Shweba,
bunkers that they would move into, early warning. Ultimately.
and I will quote from the Washington Post article of July twelfth. Shweba, this is a quote, " Shweba did not have any of the systems that would take down the one-way attacks she had drones, and initial security assessments found that the base was not adequately protected." Soldiers at Port Shwayba have also been quoted in news reports saying that requests for additional medical and drone defense systems were denied prior to the conflict with Iran beginning. Why were those requests denied, Secretary Hegseth?
Um, I would I would confer with Admiral Cooper, but there were not a single drone or defense request denied At any level that I'm aware of, we did everything we could to move heaven and earth in every
Again, Secretary Hicks had an article from July twelfth,
single location to protect every single American we possibly could.
Washington Post also quoted a soldier saying that the unit's request for an eagle's drone defense system was denied because of lack of assets that's an end quote. Um, US Army Central has conducted an investigation into that attack. Do you commit to releasing findings of that investigation publicly, yes or no?
Um, we'll get you the status of that, I would argue if it was a if it was a resource resource constraint, that's precisely why we're having this hearing today, to speed up systems to the battlefield, to war fighters as fast as humanly possible. It's been too slow in the past, it needs to be faster,
Will you, after releasing the findings of that investigation publicly,
the reforms we're undertaking will do that.
yes or no?
I will I will work with Admiral Cooper to make sure it's handled properly. Yes, Senator.
Thank you. Uh, Secretary Hegseth, I traveled to Was- uh, Walter Reed Military Hospital and met with sol- soldiers who were injured in that attack. What they told me confirmed what other soldiers have said publicly, that most of these soldiers injured in the attack did not receive proper medical care in Kuwait, in Germany, or during their initial days back in the US. The US military has been fighting wars in the Middle East, for twenty-five years, why was proper medical care not immediately available to these injured soldiers, and why were they not immediately screened for traumatic brain injuries?
The
I I'm not taking issue with the characterization of individual soldiers, but I would argue that, uh, every effort was made to provide every level of medical care possible understanding how CENTCOM operates.
The center's time has expired and there is a vote on it. Senator Capito.
Thank you Madam Chair, thank you all for being here. Thank you for your service. I wanna begin because the last time that I saw you Sec- Secretary Headseth and General Kane was at the Pentagon when you honored uh Andrew Wolff who was uh attacked in here in DC in November and then the honor that you have given to Sarah Beckstrom and her family who lost her life that day as well uh I think that I know that you've been in constant contact with uh, Andrew and his family. And you also know that the great faith that they have, uh, in in the Lord above is what's really brought them to the point where they are now. So let's keep them all in his prayer. I am interested in Senator Baldwin's question because I do have a soldier from West Virginia who is making a very similar complaint. So whatever follow-up we can do, I would like to do that. I'd also like to recognize the three most recent, uh, uh, service member that we lost because we talk about them as service members and soldiers, but we I haven't heard them say their name. And they're so young. Uh, First Lieutenant Tyler James Freehand, uh, Private Isabella Gonzalez, and Sergeant Michael, uh, Swinton. Uh, you will be, uh, I guess, uh, greeting their families and, uh, unfortunately their caskets as they come forward tomorrow. Um, so, my question is, we've heard a lot about why we shouldn't be, uh, voting for this supplemental, or questions as to is that really necessary or what? I guess my question, General Kane, is what's the consequence of not passing this supplemental? Where do you see that hitting us most deeply?
Yes, ma'am. Um, it uh, it will manifest itself in a in a few different places, uh, most significantly it it'll be in military personnel related matters. We'll figure out how to pay soldiers and sailors, but that that would be a strain. operations and maintenance costs, and then the ability for the department to take some of this capital and wisely invest it in future combat capability in things like ai, uas, counter-uas, hypersonics, and space.
So not only would it hit us today, but it could hit us tomorrow as well.
Yes, ma'am. I I actually view this um uh uh as as forward-looking. As we look at the future picture and the various risks that we're facing, the supplemental war and and the budget uh frankly uh help to insure that we are properly arming the joint force for the myriad of potential contingencies that we face in the future.
Thank you. So, as as we look at one of the, I think, best successes under your, you all's leadership uh at the Department of War has been the uh the fulfillment of the recruit recruitment in every branch. Uh, I remember last year I think or maybe the year before, only the Marines could brag that they had had uh made their records and now i think that uh many many uh the the other branches are far exceeding uh what has previously done. So that tells me that American young men and women wanna serve their country, they wanna be safe, they wanna do the right thing. So how does not funding them and if they think that uh if they think that their their salaries may be short or we're gonna have a continuing resolution or we're gonna shutdown the government How can this chill what has been one of the greatest successes, I think, in terms of not just today's force, but the force of the future? And, Mister Secretary, I'll uh ask you to answer that question.
Well, in a, in a, in a brass-tack sense, uh, this one point five trillion dollar budget in its totality sees a seven percent pay raise for junior enlisted uh six percent for your NCOs and and junior officers,
Right. Mm-hmm.
and five percent for senior officers. So it's significant reflection of the value we place on top of the other increases that congress has provided them if we were to have to and we're gonna do right by the troops we're gonna make sure they get paid but it's gonna put strains on training and readiness and all the other aspects of o and m uh over time which makes its way down to the unit level i you know when you're saying we're focused on training and readiness and lethality but we have to cut back on training because congress can't get the money we need to the department that's discouraging at every single level and when young men men and women join this war department uh we want them moving immediately into the training pipeline at the highest possible level with the best possible equipment and they've seen that thus far, and that's led to historic recruiting uh momentum. We need to keep that momentum going.
Yeah, and I would say that it could have the reverse effect, if if if the if this is troubled waters here, uh and lack of confidence, which we see on the other side of the aisle there, and and questions that I think um uh wouldn't be asked if it were not of a political nature, we're gonna chill our recruiting efforts here, uh, for our young people as they look forward to serving their country and and becoming that patriot they want to be.
You're right. Or return to the valley under the Biden administration where not only did they not meet the goals, but they had to lower the goals and then didn't meet the lowered goals. And then now we're, we don't have the readiness we need as a force.
Thank you very much. Thank you all very much. Thank you, Secretary of Agriculture. I'll get to you another time. Thank you.
Senator Murphy.
Uh, thank you all for being here today. Secretary Hegseth, um, the American people either didn't want this war from the start or were deeply skeptical of this war, um, because they have seen this country make the same mistake over and over again in wars in the Middle East and that is to create either unrealistic or open-ended objectives. Um, you said in March that the United States was quote " on plan to defeat, destroy and disable all of Iran's meaningful military capabilities at a pace that would that we have the world has never seen before." Obviously, as we've discussed here today, that objective has not been achieved and is not going to be achieved. Um, Iran is adept, more adept than even at the start of the war at hiding their capabilities, or repairing after damage we have done. There's an open report that when it comes to their missile sites along the Strait of Hormuz, thirty of thirty-three are still operational.
I wouldn't believe all the open reports, Senator.
I, but I've also heard you say in this hearing that the objectives now seem to be more limited than they were at the outset of the war that this is about reopening the Strait and this is about dismantling their nuclear capability. And the President of course has said himself that he thinks Iran has a right to a missile program um so my question is pretty simple, is it correct that it is no longer a war objective to destroy all of their military capacities. This is what the president has said. Have our goals been simplified to reopening the strait and to getting into a negotiation over a nuclear program? Now, I don't think you have a realistic plan to do either of those things. But I think it's important for us to know what we're funding. Are the objectives much more limited today than they were when you made that statement in March?
So, I I think the objectives have been consistent and clear from the beginning. And I I would compare, I would contrast it to North Korea, where a conventional build-up was used to hide a nuclear capability that eventually evolved to a point where it couldn't be contested. And what Iran continued to do, even after midnight hammer, was try to build that conventional capability to dare anyone to stop them from pursuing nuclear weapons. So, getting after their conventional capabilities, missile launchers, defense industrial base, their navy, was all part of it ensuring they can't blackmail us, into into pursuing a nuclear capability.
And and and
Laser focused on Iran will never have a nuclear capability.
And and so it is, it is
That's the promise the president has made and that he will keep in every way.
I think it's, I think it's important. So it is still a war objective, either through military action or through a diplomatic agreement, to dist- destroy and disable all of Iran's meaningful military capacities including their missile program.
As far as all, when we talked about that, uh, from the podium for, uh, at the outset of this week we're talking about their defense industrial base. And if you look at the metrics of their ability to make more, uh, that it's been overwhelmingly, uh, destroyed. Not everything, but overwhelmingly. Now, do they have missiles in in underground bunker bunkers because they're a terror state? Sure they do, and we've acknowledged that from the beginning.
Yeah, I
But their capacity is less today than it's ever been as a nation.
They obviously, they obviously have significant capacity to effectively disrupt the entirety of the Middle East and oil flows out of the Middle East and that's not going to change. Um, let me ask you one more question. This is a request for supplemental funding because you don't have, uh, the funding in your base budget to do what you need to do, which makes questions about the base budget, uh, relevant. Um, there's been a lot of attention, Mister Secretary, on the modernization of a luxury jet that was gifted to the president by the government of Qatar reports suggest that maybe as much as one billion dollars in your base funding an extraordinary amount of money has been used for an upgrade and the plane is back in the shop for a second upgrade. As far as I can tell, never before has an administration not made public the amount of money for an upgrade or a construction contract on a presidential airplane. Obviously, we don't need or want disclose the details of that upgrade, but never before have you withheld from Congress and the public the total amount of money. Um, I think there are two really important questions here. One, will you make public the amount of money that you are spending to upgrade this plane? And two, can you commit to this congress and this committee that the president isn't going to take this plane with him when he leaves office the only thing more insulting to the taxpayers of spending money on a jet they don't need would be for the president to take it with him to take it out of our military inventory when he leaves office
say the air force has done an incredible job uh making that an a capable jet that ultimately uh but its capabilities are and and and investment
That's not what i'm asking.
considering securing the presidency.
Will you make the amount of money? Will you disclose the amount of money publicly?
Uh, I would I would imagine, and as part of the regular budget process, that's something that we would look at.
Uh, and and will you commit that the president will not take this check?
But you have to look at the classification level of certain things that are not devolved for reasons of national security.
Will you commit that the president will not take this check with him out of federal inventory when he leaves office?
It's that's not a decision for necessarily me to make, and ultimately, uh, we're grateful to have it.
that's deeply unsatisfactory answer to the american public
senator peters senator peters
thank you mr. chairman uh folks uh welcome to the hearing today
oh i apologize it's senator ossoff still here
oh
i'm sorry i didn't i went out of order senator ossoff
i yield my time to senator ossoff
thank you
Uh, thank you Madam Chair and uh, thank you all for your testimony and uh, General Cain, let me just begin by expressing on behalf of all Georgians, our immense gratitude and admiration for the service members uh, who are making tremendous sacrifices and conducting themselves with extraordinary selflessness and professionalism on behalf of the United States uh, and our state's unified condolences and grief for the families of the four killed in action. uh, and our hope for a swift recovery for the, the nearly one hundred wounded over the last two weeks. And thank you to you for your service to the nation. Um, uh, Mister Hegsef, you're requesting roughly sixty-eight billion dollars for the department through this supplemental, correct?
Sixty-seven, yes.
And yesterday your department stated publicly, quote, "U S forces struck Iranian military command centers maritime capabilities, missile and drone launch sites, and air defense systems to degrade Iran's ability to continue attacking commercial vessels that was a press release from your department. Is that a broadly accurate characterization of ongoing operations?
That sounds broadly accurate, yes.
On day fourteen of this conflict, Mister Secretary, day fourteen nearly five months ago, you stated that Iran's military had been " destroyed" and " made combat ineffective. That was on day fourteen of the war. Was that an accurate statement?
Um, they didn't have a navy any longer, it was completely sunk, uh, their missiles were buried underneath a a lot of their underground facilities and their defense industrial base has been almost completely destroyed. So as far as a a military assessment of Iran's capabilities, it doesn't didn't mean by any stretch of the imagination absolute zero, but their capabilities at the lowest level they've been there very long time.
Mr. Secretary, you you stated that on day fourteen of this conflict and the second week of the conflict, you stated that iran's military had been quote destroyed and quote made combat ineffective was that an accurate statement yes or no
iran's ability to challenge the united states of america at the level at which we're capable of was not possible
that's not what i asked you mr. secretary you said on day fourteen iran's military had been quote destroyed and quote made combat ineffective yes or no was that an accurate statement
what the american military has done to the iranian military is a
will you answer the question
military defeat and they're ineffective in that context.
Will you answer the question, Under Oath? Three weeks later you declared victory. That was now nearly four months ago. Three weeks after you'd already said Iran's military was destroyed and combat ineffective. You said quote " Operation Epic Fury was a historic and overwhelming victory". You said Iran's military had been rendered quote " combat ineffective for years to come". and you stated, we had quote " achieved every single objective", were those accurate statements?
Uh, it certainly was on behalf of the men and women in uniform a historic military victory over Iran.
Had Iran's military been rendered quote " combat ineffective for years to come",
Uh, there are other Uh,
that was a statement that you made four months ago.
they had a hundred and sixty na- they had a hundred and sixty naval vessels in the Blue Water Navy and they're gone.
You need to answer the questions, Mr. Secretary.
Their air force is completely combat ineffective and they don't have a defense industrial base.
You said, you said four months ago, you said four months ago. You, excuse me, Mr. Secretary.
So, describe to me a country that doesn't have an air force, a navy, or a
mister secretary
and i will describe to you a company that country that does not have an effective military it can lob missiles not a
your secretary you stated mister secretary you stated four months ago that iran's military had been rendered
lob missiles but it's not a combat effective military
quote combat ineffective for years to come has iran's military been for the last four months combat ineffective
it's been set back not just years but likely decades considering it can't build at the level it did before and not even close it doesn't mean it doesn't have capabilities
you stated we had quote you stated you stated we had quote mister secretary you stated we had "achieved every single objective." Was that an accurate statement four months ago?
The main objective of this was to ensure that Iran never gets a nuclear weapon. Their main sights were obliterated. We're watching over them and we're holding them at issue. If they don't give them up at the table, there's other ways we can take them away.
Early in the conflict on day three,
Iran will never have a nuclear weapon.
Mister Secretary, early in the conflict day three, you said one of those core objectives was to " destroy the missile threat". And as you restated on day five to, " obliterate iran's missiles and drones those were clearly and repeatedly stated core objectives of the campaign which four months ago you declared had been completed victoriously with every single objective achieved were those objectives achieved four months ago
no one ever stated that every single missile was gone ultimately combat ineffective means they're not able to dig them out of their u. g. f. s. and shoot at us that doesn't mean they don't have underground facilities where they put missiles in them and hold on to them cause they're the
had the missile threat been defeated four months ago
the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism. So, we never expected they would stop having capabilities to shoot. The question is at scale against opponent like the United States of America, which went toe-to-toe with them and Iran couldn't and cannot handle it.
You stated on March eighth, day nine of the war on sixty minutes, you assured the American people of Iranian surrender. Does that remain your prediction?
Ultimately, Iran will never have a nuclear weapon to threaten the United States of America. That has been the objective and it remains so.
so just to review you will not answer whether your statement made on the fourteenth day of the war that iran's military had been quote destroyed and made combat ineffective was a truthful statement to the american people as you sit here and ask for tens of billions more for the conflict
the senator's time has expired
but a historic and effective military campaign against the largest state sponsor of terrorism and war they never get an equal weapon senator
won't answer the question
senator peters is recognized
Thank you, uh, Madam Chair, and, uh, thank you to our witnesses, uh, here today. I wanna, uh, begin by first, uh, echoing, uh, my colleagues' uh, comments, uh, that we've heard throughout, uh, the hearing here. And join them in mourning the loss, uh, of American service members, uh, who were killed, uh, in action these last few days. Uh, my thoughts are with their families, uh, with a service member who remains, uh, missing and with all those injured, uh, during the strikes. Um, and I will continue to, uh Pray for their families. Secretary Hegsef, uh, over the course of the war with Iran, I have uh repeatedly expressed concerns regarding the administration's lack of a winning strategy, and repeated contradictions uh about uh the state of the war. Uh, yeah frankly it doesn't help that you uh and your president continues to mislead uh the American people. You and the president have repeatedly said that the war, as we've heard over and over again, uh is almost over. or already won. In fact, the president alone has said the war is almost over more than thirty times. On March first, the president said, uh, we'll be done in four or five weeks. On March ninth, he said the war was very complete. On April eighth, he declared total and complete victory. One hundred percent, no question about it. On the same day you declared Operation Epic Fury was a historic and overwhelming victory on the battlefield a capital V military victory. by any measure. And yet today, July twenty-first, we have soldiers whose remains are sadly gonna be returned to their deeply grieving families tomorrow. Clearly, the war is not over yet. After months of conflict, our strategy to win remains unclear. I have long said the United States has the strongest military in history in the world, and I have no doubt that our brave service members can execute any mission and prevail in any battle. But without a clear winning strategy, we're at risk of being in another forever war that'll put our service members in continued harm's way and continue to cost taxpayers billions of dollars. Secretary Hegg said despite uh our your failure to win this war, uh you are back now before Congress asking for almost seventy billion dollars in additional funding. you're asking the american people for a blank check because once again the trump administration's efforts have been an utter and complete failure to win this war to this point so my question for you sir is how is your strategy different than what we've seen in the past so far we have not seen a strategy that's been successful you mentioned nuclear material is of primary goal of the war it still exists we haven't dealt with that issue yet you talk about the destruction of missiles and yet the missiles that we saw hit Recent targets are actually somehow more lethal, more deadly, more maneuverable than what we have seen in the past, so they're obviously improving uh their munitions. The Strait of Hormuz uh is uh still closed, reminding everybody it was opened before the war. Prices were lower for everybody until the war, and it still remains uh closed. And of course uh tragically people, service members, our war fighters, who we care deeply about, are still dying. So what's different? Mister Hegsiff, so Secretary Hegsiff.
I think your characterization of this incredible effort as a failure is reckless. Uh, and I think it's irresponsible. And I think it smears the sacrifice of the troops that are out there making on behalf of the American people to ensure that Iran never gets a nuclear weapon. Shame on you and others who call this a quagmire and a failure, and then you wanna turn around and say you support the warfighter. Either you do or you don't.
Is the nuclear material still there, sir?
I can get you a ticket, I can get you a ticket out to CENTCOM and talk to what those americans are doing how committed they are to this effort and how they want to ensure that iran never threatens their families with a nuclear weapon it's a it is that that's the kind of intensity that our war fighters have about making sure that iran isn't capable of doing that
secretary haggis if did you if you listen to my comments you tell you would have heard me say how amazing our war fighters are
i heard failure and the word heard eh i i heard exactly what you said
if you i i will tell you how i use the word failure cause i use the word failure to their leaders
i heard exactly what you said
you sir are the failure not the men and women who are on that front line not the the men and women who hold up uh their honor with uh distinction, but if there's a lack of a winning strategy, they're in harm's way, their leaders have failed them. And that's what's happening. We have political leadership, you. You don't have a strategy, you don't have a long-term plan to actually win this war. Win the war. The men and women are gonna be able to do it, but they need to have leadership.
Of course we have leadership, of course we have leadership.
When will you show leadership? When will you show leadership?
Why don't you show some leadership and stand up for your fellow Democrats who won't fund the troops? who stand and play partisan politics while you don't give us the money. You wanna stand up here and talk about the troops? You won't show any political courage to actually fund our department
secretary secretary Hegsdorf
cuz you have trump trump derangement syndrome and can't actually commit to anything meaningful so I put this on you senator.
senator secretary Hegsdorf you have trillions you have over a trillion dollars you're asking for one and a half trillion dollars it's not a question of money, it's a question of leadership and understanding what it takes to actually win and to bring
Political of democrats who won't fund the troops.
Senator's time has expired. This will conclude our hearing. I want to thank our witnesses for being present and the committee for what it's certainly been a vigorous discussion. For any senators who wish to submit additional questions for the record, Those questions will be due in seven days on Tuesday, July twenty eighth by five p m. I'm going to ask the rank the Vice Chair if she has any final comments.
I do very quickly, and thank you, Chair Collins. This was really an important discussion about the state of this tragic and disastrous war and how we should be spending Americans' tax dollars on families instead of this President's war of choice. Unfortunately, this hearing has done exceptionally little to justify the President's request, or to instill confidence that this administration has an exit plan or a strategy to end the war. This war's cost us a lot. The last thing we should be doing is rubber-stamping another seventy billion dollars to help Trump keep it going. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
Well, Vice Chair Murray, I'm compelled to respond to your comments by pointing out that it is the duty of this committee to have a hearing when we have this kind of supplemental request so i think that your comment was not appropriate yes
absolutely totally
and i do appreciate the hearing i do this hearing is now adjourned
thank you
Morning digest
Start every morning briefed on yesterday’s hearings
A free weekday email covering yesterday’s hearings and transcripts newly unlocked in the archive.



