Opening Statement (As Prepared)
Click here to stream the hearing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First, I would like to take this opportunity to welcome our witnesses, in particular, newly confirmed Secretary Meink. I look forward to working with you as you endeavor to address the significant work that must be done across the Department of the Air Force to acknowledge and respond to the increasingly complex global security landscape which faces us today.
Recognizing this complicated landscape, and understanding that the Department of the Air Force has had to make tough decisions regarding core missions across both air superiority and space domains – I hope to further understand from the witnesses today how this budget balances the need to maintain credible combat levels, while shifting to address a much more dynamic future. Particularly, how does the FY26 request address the need for next-generation systems by increasing their research and development efforts in critical areas, such as tactical and strategic aircraft, joint all-domain command and control (JAD-C2), intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) capabilities, satellite communications, missile warning and track, and ground infrastructure to support the future space architecture?
While we do not have specifics regarding this budget request, broadly I will continue to support the retirement of aircraft that are less relevant in the modern operational environment, in lieu of platforms that are equipped to face the future threat. However, in recent years the Air Force has not procured a sufficient number of modern fighter aircraft that meets or exceeds the number of divested legacy aircraft. This translates to operational risk, and I’d ask our witnesses today to explain how you are managing this risk as you redesign and field the modern force. I’d also like to hear Air Force’s perspective on the F-35 program and its inability to deliver the Block 4 capabilities that we need, and how this reduces your ability to counter the modern threat. To that end, while I fully embrace acquisition reforms and force design initiatives with an aim towards quickly delivering capability to the warfighters, I am deeply concerned with the recent announcement by the Secretary of Defense to hollow out the Department of Operational Test and Evaluation, and fear that as a result we may field weapons systems that don't work as designed, as the Air Force has struggled with several programs in achieving operational capability that adequately meet warfighter requirements when delivered.
Further, the FY2026 budget request continues to make multi-billion dollar investments in the air and land legs of the nuclear triad, despite continued concern with the path forward of the Sentinel program. The Sentinel program, which reached a critical breach in cost and schedule, has the potential to consume a significant portion of the Air Force budget in the coming years. As the Department continues progress through the Nunn-McCurdy process, Department of Defense leadership must take a hard look at what will have to be cut in future budgets if we continue to sink billions of dollars into an architecture that was designed decades ago.
Lastly, the Air Force is being spread thin as it focuses on modernization and recapitalization while dealing with an aging fleet and pilot and workforce shortages. I am interested in hearing more about how the Air Force will mitigate these challenges to counter a near-peer threats.
As we turn to space, the previous Administration made significant progress in pivoting to more resilient architectures, and placing an increased focus on how to better integrate commercial capabilities and solutions across various mission areas of the Space Force. I am concerned with rumors we are hearing of this budget request that it would potentially reverse some of the progress we have made to date in both of these areas. The potential of shifting away from programs like Resilient-GPS, future Space Development Agency tranches, or a significant reduction in commercial imagery procurement could have severe negative impacts not only in the near-term, but as we look to the future – we must have a robust space industrial-base ecosystem to meet the demands of the warfighter as global threats both on-earth and on-orbit increase. Further, in order to ensure we do not repeat the past when it comes to poor acquisition success in both satellite and ground-system programs, we must place an increased emphasis on building and maintaining acquisition excellence in the Space Force – including both military and civilian personnel. I am concerned that this community has been hardest hit by DOGE, and with a pivot away from training and assigning young guardians to acquisition jobs there will be a direct negative impact on the Service’s ability to fully leverage the innovative U.S. space industry, and design, develop and deploy our future architectures to address an increasingly weaponized domain.
Thank you, and I look forward to receiving today’s testimony on all of these issues.