McConnell Remarks at SAC-D FY27 Navy Budget Hearing

WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, delivered the following opening statement at today's hearing, "A Review of the President's Fiscal Year 2027 Budget Request for the Navy":

I want to start by acknowledging the men and women of the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps. They continue to meet lengthy deployments, a high operational tempo, and evolving threats with professionalism, determination, and bravery that are a credit to the entire joint force.

You know as well as anyone how the operational capacity of the fleet, the production capacity of the industrial base, and the depth of our magazines are being tested today. You know how little room for mistakes there is in the training, readiness, and deployment of the world's greatest fighting force.

So I must tell you: the way PB27 is structured - particularly in accounts that matter a great deal to the Department of the Navy - is a mistake… And unfortunately, it's not a new one:

Last year, the ink was barely dry on the one-time reconciliation investment in shipbuilding when this Subcommittee began to hear from uniformed leaders about budget discrepancies, shortfalls, and broken glass in major accounts.

This didn't come as a surprise - it was the avoidable consequence of treating one-time infusions of cash like a substitute for full-year base budget spending.

This is not a mistake worth repeating. But the way OMB has structured your budget suggests the Administration is willing to run even more significant risks in FY27.

Take munitions: Last year, the Subcommittee fully funded one of the Navy's top unfunded priorities: accelerated development of the MACE cruise missile.

This year, the budget request would put funds for procuring these new munitions not in sustainable, annual discretionary appropriations but in a one-time reconciliation slug.

Likewise, the budget request strangely splits funding of multiyear procurement contracts for key Navy munitions between annual appropriations and one-time reconciliation.

Gentlemen, the entire premise of multiyear procurement is consistent yearly appropriations.

It's right there in the name.

How the Department expects to send a consistent and reliable demand signal to industry with one-off reconciliation cash is beyond me.

Perhaps you can explain.

To be clear, I'm glad to see basic things like ship operations appropriately built into the FY27 base. And the same goes for sustainment of the F-35 - even belatedly, it's good to see this critical platform's operational readiness prioritized.

But requesting new procurement for this aircraft in one-time reconciliation spending is an unnecessary risk.

Also on the topic of aviation, I hope you have good news on F/A-XX. We've seen more than a year's worth of delays and $250 million wasted on contract extensions for F/A-XX.

Our adversaries have American air superiority in their crosshairs, and the longer we delay these investments, the more our edge is blunted.

Admiral Caudle, I know you've been outspoken on the important "workhorse" role that destroyers play in today's surface fleet.

So I'll also need to hear you square this request's failure to include a second DDG with the continued high demand for their capabilities.

Gentlemen, another topic we'll need to hear from you on is the lessons you're taking from current conflicts and how they inform your thinking about Navy and Marine Corps modernization.

In recent months, Iran has extracted a price, effectively striking U.S. and partner military targets across the region. We've also continued to use exquisite interceptors to take down cheap, attritable drones. Why haven't we adapted more quickly to the modern battlefield?

Two weeks ago, Iran used small boats and drones against U.S. destroyers in the Strait of Hormuz, threatening these billion-dollar warships and the sailors who operate them.

What are we doing to increase protection while reducing the cost of defending these ships? Should we be using drone boats to add layers of protection for sailors? Why aren't we more prepared to use drones for counter-mine operations?

Meanwhile, Ukraine continues to use drone vessels effectively against Russian assets in the Black Sea. What happens if Iran learns these lessons before we do? Or when China adopts them at scale?

At the most basic level, what is the Department of the Navy doing to ensure that U.S. sailors and Marines benefit from every possible advantage of modern military technology?

If you ask me, one of the obvious ways to do is to continue to invest in the alliances and partnerships that extend our reach and amplify our deterrent power.

There is nothing to be gained from opting out of close engagement with battlefield experts like the Ukrainians… and with capable and committed partners from the first island chain to NATO's eastern front.

Mr. Secretary, Admiral Caudle, General Smith - I'll look forward to hearing your views on these and other topics.

Permalink: https://www.mcconnell.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2026/5/mcconnell-remarks-at-sac-d-fy27-navy-budget-hearing