Lawmakers from both sides push Pentagon for details on supplemental funding request
The article centers government voices exclusively—Pentagon officials and bipartisan lawmakers—with no independent analysis, expert commentary, or outside perspective. Language is largely neutral and procedural ('expressed frustration,' 'testified'), though 'Secretary of War' is non-standard terminology (official title is 'Secretary of Defense'). The framing presents bipartisan concern about budget transparency as legitimate oversight without interrogating the scale of spending ($1.5 trillion+) or broader strategic questions.
Primary voices: elected official, state or recognized government
- This article does not address independent analysis of whether the Pentagon's budget priorities align with strategic doctrine or threat assessments
- This article does not include voices from defense reform advocates, fiscal hawks outside government, or cost-benefit analysis of specific weapons systems mentioned
- This article does not contextualize the $1.5 trillion defense budget relative to other federal spending or international defense spending
Framing may shift if reconciliation fails to pass or if war costs escalate further, potentially reframing congressional frustration as prescient or the Pentagon's approach as inadequate.
Government-sourcedBoth-sides framingEstablishment framing
A bipartisan cadre of lawmakers in both the House and Senate expressed frustration with the Pentagon on Tuesday for the lack of information the department has provided on its budget request.
Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Pentagon comptroller Jules Hurst III testified on Tuesday about the budget request in back-to-back hearings in front of the House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee and the Senate Appropriations Defense Subcommittee.
The fiscal 2027 request includes $1.15 trillion in the base budget with an expected $350 billion from reconciliation, which is a congressional tactic that allows measures to pass with a simple majority in the Senate.
“The subcommittee needs to understand how the resources requested in this budget translates into real, measurable improvements in warfighting capability,” Rep. Ken Calvert (R-CA), the chair of the House Appropriations defense subcommittee, said during the hearing on Tuesday.
“It would be helpful to get the supplemental sooner rather than later.”
Rep. Betty McCollum (D-MN) said lawmakers need the details of the request by June 11 because that’s the date the subcommittee meets to mark up the annual defense bill.
Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK), the House Appropriations Committee chair, added: “I don’t have any concerns about the amount. … I am worried about the ability to sustain that number through the reconciliation process, at some point the money disappears.”
The subject also came up during their appearance before the Senate subcommittee.
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), the chairman of the subcommittee, said: “Political realities will not always allow a party-line budget reconciliation, and if the department’s top priorities aren’t built into annual appropriations, we’re actually taking a big risk.”
The Kentucky senator agreed with the department’s prioritization of the Golden Dome missile defense system, munitions, F-35 fighter jets, and drone production but disagreed with their inclusion in the expected inclusion of those funds through reconciliation, saying, “these key lines of effort only work if we put them on solid footing.”
McConnell continued: “The 27 request failed to make room in the base budget for some of the military’s top priorities. The distinction between base and reconciliation really matters, base funding is what creates budget stability for the services and sends consistent demand signals to industry.”
Despite the repeated requests for more details, Hegseth did not provide them.
“In a perfect world, everything would get done in regular order and with a $1.5 trillion top line,” he said at one point during the House hearing. “But there are a lot of challenges and dynamics, some of which I don’t control. And ultimately, we look forward to working with the committee to ensuring, however it shakes out, that it’s full transparency with you and maximizing options for the department.”
The department’s comptroller, Hurst, told lawmakers during Tuesday’s House subcommittee hearing that the projected cost of the war is currently up to $29 billion. He said the war has cost about $24 billion, excluding military construction costs.
The cost of the Iran war is not included in the budget request because it was formulated before the conflict began, Hurst told reporters previously. The Pentagon has been in talks with Congress about a possible third bill requesting funds to cover the costs of the war.
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first.
Sign in to leave a comment.