Calvert Remarks at Budget Hearing on the United States Navy and Marine Corps

The Subcommittee will come to order.

Today, the Subcommittee will receive testimony from: 

• The Honorable Hung Cao, Acting Secretary of the Navy;
• Admiral Daryl Caudle, Chief of Naval Operations;
• And General Eric Smith, Commandant of the United States Marine Corps

This hearing comes at a consequential time for the Navy and Marine Corps. Since last fall, our naval forces have operated at a high operation tempo in support of counternarcotic efforts in the Western Hemisphere. Today, in the Middle East, our sailors and marines continue to demonstrate their unmatched ability to project power, deter aggression, and protect American interests in one of the world's most complex and consequential theaters.

It is critical that the Iranian government never possess the ability to produce nuclear weapons, and I have profound respect for the bravery and professionalism of our sailors and marines. However, these operations are not without cost. Our munitions stockpiles are depleted, our fleet has deferred critical maintenance, and our servicemembers have been operating on extended deployments.

Despite our focus on the Middle East and elsewhere around the globe, China remains our pacing threat. Today, China surpasses the U.S. Navy in the total number of warships in their fleet, and its shipbuilding capacity is estimated to be over 200 times greater. By most assessments, China now holds a considerable advantage over the United States in munitions stockpiles and production capacity. It is against this backdrop we will discuss the Navy’s FY27 budget request today. 

The Navy’s FY27 request totals $377.5 billion, which represents a 23 percent increase over FY26. The request is split between $338.7 billion in discretionary funding and $38.8 billion in mandatory. I think it is worth noting that mandatory funding is subject to legislative dynamics outside the Department’s and this subcommittee’s control. I am concerned that many priority programs are funded on the Navy’s mandatory side of the ledger. 

The Navy’s FY27 request makes a significant down payment towards growing the fleet through the Department’s ambitious Golden Fleet Initiative, including over $60 billion in discretionary funding for shipbuilding. This is the kind of historic investment required to reinvigorate U.S. shipbuilding. However, funding alone does not guarantee on-time delivery and is no substitute for sound program management and rigorous oversight. Speed without accountability is how programs go sideways. The Navy’s cost-to-complete request for shipbuilding totals $2.6 billion in FY27. Delayed contracts now rival the cost of ships themselves. 

Despite significant investment in submarine programs and the industrial base, Columbia-class and Virginia-class programs are delayed by as much as 18 to 42 months, respectively. Carriers, destroyers, and amphibs all face growing delays to future ship deliveries. Shipyards that will be essential to delivering Navy’s Golden Fleet are plagued by workforce challenges and high attrition rates. I’m concerned that significant funding for the maritime industrial base has been requested in mandatory funding. 

It’s not enough to add ships to the budget. We must appropriately invest in growing the workforce, increasing capacity, and supporting innovation for the industrial base to support production. The budget proposes $22.6 billion for Navy weapons procurement, of which $11.8 billion is requested in discretionary funding. Critical munitions such as Tomahawk, Standard Missile, and other air-launched weapons are mostly budgeted for in mandatory funding. Procurement dollars for low-cost, hypersonic weapons are funded exclusively in mandatory. Once again, I’m concerned by this approach. 

I have long advocated for supplemental funding to address our munitions shortfalls, and I hope we receive a request from the Department soon. Naval aviation remains America’s most powerful and responsive strike instrument. Operations in the Middle East have once again demonstrated what carrier-based air power can accomplish when properly resourced and led. The Navy’s request makes critical investment in aviation, proposing to procure 123 aircraft in FY27, including six additional E-2D, a platform that has proven indispensable in CENTCOM operations. 

I am concerned, however, that significant funding for the F-35 program, our only fifth-generation fighter in production, is heavily budgeted in mandatory. That said, I’m happy to see that your budget documents note the Navy’s commitment to a 6^th Generation Fighter. I understand that the Department intends to make a long-awaited down select for Navy’s F/A-XX program this summer. My support for this capability and the fleet’s requirement for a sixth-generation fighter remains unwavering. I look forward to seeing this program move forward.

Finally, turning to the Marine Corps, the FY27 request reflects continued Force Design transformation, with priorities centered on fielding Marine Littoral Regiments, accelerating the Medium Landing Ship, and modernizing long-range precision fires and anti-ship capabilities to operate inside contested maritime spaces. The request also includes investments in Marine aviation, barracks modernization, and counter-drone capabilities.As the Marine Corps seeks to field new capabilities under Force Design, it is critical that acquisition programs are built on sound requirements and realistic schedules. 

Before we hear from our witnesses, I would like to recognize the distinguished Ranking Member, Ms. McCollum, for any opening comments.