Full Committee Markup: FY26 NDAA

Committee on Armed Services

2025-07-15

Loading video...

Source: Congress.gov

Summary

This meeting of the committee involved the presentation and approval of several subcommittee prints, focusing on various aspects of defense, followed by a series of debates and votes on specific amendments to the Chairman's Mark. Members engaged in a largely collaborative process for the subcommittee prints, while discussions on certain amendments revealed significant partisan divisions and strong disagreements.

Themes

Defense Acquisition and Capability Enhancement

The committee emphasized fundamentally reforming defense acquisition to streamline processes and reduce the time required to field new military capabilities, which is seen as critical for deterring adversaries. The Bipartisan Speed Act was highlighted as a key initiative in this reform, which included investments in the munitions industrial base and accelerating US-manufactured drone procurement.[ 00:29:33 ] Specific advancements include elevating the Joint Counter Unmanned Aircraft Systems Office (JCO) and supporting air superiority programs like the F-15EX, F-47, F-AXX, and F-35 aircraft, along with increasing funding for F-35 spare parts.[ 00:41:53-00:42:53 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 Naval forces were also a significant focus, with provisions for Columbia-class and Virginia-class submarines, destroyers, oilers, and new sealift vessels, along with investments in sonar buoys and air refueling aircraft to strengthen sea power and projection forces.

Strategic Forces Modernization

Efforts were made to modernize the nation's nuclear triad, enhance scientific capabilities in nuclear command, control, and communications architecture, and support the nuclear deterrent. A new rapid capabilities program was established within the National Nuclear Security Administration to address growing threats from China and Russia, and legislative authority was provided for the Missile Defense Agency to recapitalize aging missile range instrumentation vessels.[ 00:54:04-00:54:40 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 In space, the tactical surveillance, reconnaissance, and tracking programs were formalized, and the department was pushed to use private sector payment models for commercial satellite communication services.[ 00:54:50-00:54:57 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in

Readiness and Military Personnel Quality of Life

The mark focused on reinforcing current readiness, including Joint Strike Fighter maintenance reform and clarifying amphibious ship readiness goals, as well as re-establishing safety as a cultural priority following incidents like the Army Black Hawk collision. Reforms to the military construction process were introduced to improve efficiency and reduce costs. For military personnel, the bill supports a 3.8% pay increase, extends special pay authorities, expands access for military recruiters, enhances oversight of the military health system, and expands childcare pilot programs.[ 01:48:12-01:48:55 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in

Cyber, Information Technology, and Innovation

The subcommittee aims to ensure warfighters are equipped with innovative technologies by prioritizing improvements in testing and evaluation through digital processes, supporting research and development of novel technologies, and enhancing the department's cyber practices. Provisions leverage AI to bolster cybersecurity skills, create new lines of effort for generative AI, and lay the framework for AI adoption within the department. The print also supports hypersonic programs and includes recommendations from the National Security Commission on Emerging Biotechnology.

Debates on Accountability and Ethics

Significant debate arose over several amendments, highlighting concerns about accountability and ethics within the defense establishment.

  • An amendment to establish human rights offices in all combatant commands faced opposition for being an "unfunded mandate" and redundant to existing protections, while supporters argued it would enhance legitimacy and effectiveness of military operations.[ 02:09:18 ]

    Citation requires full transcript

    Sign in to continue

    Sign in
  • An amendment sought to prohibit funds for modifying a foreign-sourced aircraft for executive lift, citing the Emoluments Clause and questioning the cost-effectiveness and transparency of accepting a gift from Qatar.[ 02:26:05 ]

    Citation requires full transcript

    Sign in to continue

    Sign in
     Opponents argued for the urgent need for a capable presidential aircraft given delays with current replacements, and some viewed the amendment as politically motivated.[ 02:27:10 ]

    Citation requires full transcript

    Sign in to continue

    Sign in
  • Amendments were introduced to address the alleged sharing of classified information via Signal by the Secretary of Defense, with proponents demanding accountability for national security breaches and potential endangerment of service members.[ 02:48:22 ]

    Citation requires full transcript

    Sign in to continue

    Sign in
     Critics deemed these amendments partisan, premature due to an ongoing IG review, or as unnecessary interference with defense operations.[ 02:49:08 ]

    Citation requires full transcript

    Sign in to continue

    Sign in
  • Amendments aiming to mandate merit-based personnel decisions and reinstate rigorous, academically focused admission standards for military academies ignited a debate on the role of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) versus meritocracy. Supporters argued for eliminating "identity-based favoritism" to ensure the most competent individuals lead, while opponents contended that diversity is a strength and that an overly narrow definition of "merit" overlooks critical leadership qualities and perpetuates bias.

Tone of the Meeting

The tone of the meeting was largely bipartisan and collaborative during the initial stages, particularly when subcommittee chairs and ranking members introduced their prints and thanked staff for their work.[ 00:29:55 ] [ 00:52:41 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 There was a shared sense of purpose in strengthening national defense and supporting service members. However, the tone shifted to become distinctly contentious and deeply divided during the debate and voting on specific amendments, particularly those touching on political conduct, ethics, and social issues within the military.[ 02:10:58 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
[ 02:27:52 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in
 Strong expressions of frustration and disagreement were voiced by members on both sides, with accusations of "partisan posturing," "politicization," and "grandstanding" from some, and urgent calls for "accountability" and "common sense" from others.[ 02:49:08 ]

Citation requires full transcript

Sign in to continue

Sign in

Participants

Transcript

is simply not meeting the needs of our warfighters.  The Bipartisan Speed Act that the ranking member and I introduced will fundamentally reform defense acquisition.  It streamlines the process and significantly reduces the time it takes to fill new military capabilities.  Reforming our acquisition system and investing in enhanced capabilities is critical to deterring our adversaries.   This bill is the product of hundreds of hours of oversight done by all members and staff over the past few months.  It is a strong bill that will help reform acquisition systems, revitalize the defense industrial base, and build the ready, capable, and lethal fighting force we need to deter China and other adversaries.  I want to commend the ranking member and his staff for continuing our tradition of putting this bill together in a strong bipartisan manner.   I also want to thank all members for their input and assistance.  There are more than 700 amendments for us to work through today.  I urge all members to work together to get us through this process in a timely manner.  There will be disagreements, but we have the same goal to support the men and women who serve our nation.  If we can keep that goal in mind, I'm very optimistic that the bill we'll report out today will be a strong bipartisan bill.  Chair, now I yield to the ranking member for any opening statement he may have.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  I appreciate that.  And thank you very much for your leadership.  I agree.  This has been a very bipartisan effort between the chair ranking, all of the members and the staffs to produce an excellent product that we have as the base bill and as the starting point.  I think the chairman's emphasis has been right on point.   emphasizing acquisition reform.  I sort of think of like three big challenges we have.  One is to make sure that we support the servicemen and women and their families.  We took a big swing at that last year, again, in a very bipartisan way, put together a bill that I think is making a real difference.  This bill enhances that.   Second, get after the innovation problem, the acquisition problem, how slow the Pentagon moves to acquire the critical new technologies that we need.  We've done some good work on that over the years.  This bill represents the most comprehensive and effective swing in acquisition reform that I've seen in my almost 29 years here on the committee.  The chairman did an outstanding job of bringing people together, having conversations over the course of the last year to prepare us   um to get the text right and i think this bill is incredibly important because of acquisition reform the third big challenge is to get to capacity in terms of critical munitions critical technologies that we need to make we don't make as much as we should whether you're talking about drones basic artillery different pieces of equipment obviously the ship problems have been well documented   We still have a lot of work to go to get to the numbers that we need and to get to the manufacturing efficiency that we need, but I think this bill does a decent job of that as well.  The problems that I have are unrelated to what this committee has done, but when you look at the needs within national security, the other budget decisions that have been made by this administration and by this Congress really put us in an incredibly deep hole.   You know, we just passed a budget bill that added another $3.5 trillion to the debt, cut a massive number of taxes, many of which are sunsetted, by the way.
So we're going to come back and we're going to have the same argument about, oh, my gosh, you can't increase taxes.   in two or three years.  So we're going to lift those sunsets, drive ourselves even deeper in debt, put ourselves in a position where we cannot pay for the very national security needs that I know pretty much every member of this committee supports.  I've used this line a number of times, and I'm going to keep using it.  If you believe in the importance of funding national security, of funding our troops, then you ought to be willing to pay for it.  We can't just keep putting it on a credit card.   which is what we're doing.  And then we also had in that bill $170 billion for border security.  $170 billion to secure a border that, according to the president, the same president who was asking for that $170 billion, is already secure.  Which, by the way, I kind of agree with him.  I think he was the one who said we don't need to change the law, we just need to change presidents.  But apparently we need to change the law, too,   if we're going to throw another $170 billion at it.  And that undercuts our ability to meet our national security needs, particularly because they're also grabbing a lot of Department of Defense assets to use in that effort and undermining our ability to meet our national security needs.  And the last complaint I have,   And go back to the Secretary Gates made the comment, if you're going to cut the State Department, you better give me more ammunition.  Well, we are absolutely gutting the State Department.  We've shut down USAID.

Sign up for free to see the full transcript

Accounts help us prevent bots from abusing our site. Accounts are free and will allow you to access the full transcript.

Sign up