It's Worth Every Single Penny And Then Some': Mitch McConnell Urges Military Modernization Funding

I'll begin by welcoming the Secretary of the Air Force, Troy Meeks, Chief of Staff of the Air Force, General David Alvin, and Chief of Space Force Operations, General Towson. Thanks to each of you for your decades of service to our country. Thanks as well to the airmen and guardians that you all lead. This weekend's successful operations over Iran served as a reminder of the immense skill and professionalism of America's men and women in uniform. Pilots operating coolly in enemy air base. Dozens of aircraft and thousands of personnel helping to get them safely over their targets. Massively powerful ordnance delivered with the utmost precision and all flights returning home safely. The way I see it, there are two key takeaways here. The first one is the value of allies and partners. Israel's magnificent military and intelligence operations created the strategic opportunity. In degrading Iran's air defenses, the Israelis demonstrated how highly competent allies act as force multipliers in the face of common threats. We ought to keep this in mind when we look at Europe and the Indo-Pacific as well. Allies and partners are going to be essential to any big fight, and we should not underestimate their value. Of course, at the end of the day, nobody in the world but the U.S. Air Force can what you did this weekend. America's ability to project power globally is unparalleled. That brings me to the second takeaway. Military promise simply doesn't happen overnight. The most sophisticated military in world history is the product of trillions of dollars over decades. Sustaining this military force isn't cheap. Modernizing it to preserve our military edge is even more expensive. But if we value the lives of our service members, the unprecedented peace we've experienced since World War II, and the fruits of American-led international order, then it's worth every single penny and then some. America's most determined adversaries have studied the capabilities and the tactics of our military closely, and have developed advanced radars, sensors, and long-range air defenses to counter precisely the strength that we showed last weekend. The PRC has been playing a long game to challenge American promising. By contrast, in crucial ways, we've been taking our edge for granted. Chronic underfunding of the National Defense has become a habit of consecutive administrations. Unfortunately, the budget we're here to discuss today is no exception. In fact, the President's request for fiscal 26 falls well short of meeting the requirements imposed by today's threat landscape. We simply will not keep pace with the pacing threat of China if we're not even willing to keep pace with inflation. The Air Force needs to modernize its bomber and fighter fleets. It needs new tankers and command and control aircraft. It also needs longer-range and more sophisticated munitions, and it needs a lot of them. The Space Force needs advanced satellite technologies, resilient communication systems, and enhanced surveillance capabilities to deter aggression, ensure freedom of maneuver, and to maintain uninterrupted space-based support to joint and allied forces back on planet Earth. And you can't do any of it with anemic-based budgets. You just can't. Preserving our military edge and the peace will require sustained and significant increases in defense spending, not just a one-time infusion. But it's not just the size of fiscal 26 requests many of us are concerned about. It's also the structure of the request. Administrations ask Congress to split the funds for massive procurement efforts like B-21 and Sentinel between the base budget and the reconciliation bill. I struggle to understand how putting programs with broad bipartisan support in a simple majority partisan reconciliation bill won't function like a shell game for avoiding making the sort of annual base budget investments we begged the last administration to make. The need for stable production of aircraft seems to argue for year-on-year funding baked into the base budget. The constrained top line, of course, is forcing services to make artificially tough choices. In your case, let me just say this. We all want to go to space, but let's be honest about the risk and tradeoff this request is forcing you to make. If the choice you're facing is between an available advanced airborne system with onboard battle management and a nation space capability, you're going to have to resist the urge to turn proven capabilities like E-7 into bill payers. There's value in redundancy. We should be making investments in both airborne and space-based command and control. They say that in space no one can hear you scream, but squandering our advantage in this critical domain because we can't find the political will to maintain it, that would mean plenty of screaming here on earth with devastating consequences for U.S. military operations on land, air, and sea. So I hope we'll also hear from you about how the Air Force is addressing munitions shortfalls, not just in the massive ordnance penetrators deployed this weekend to great effect, but across the entire spectrum of both offensive and defensive capabilities on which Air Force operations are built. I've been hoping to hear from each service how production challenges are being addressed and the Air Force will be no exception. Speaking of the MOP, I need to address the manufactured controversy over the extent to which the strikes damaged Iran's nuclear program. We haven't been briefed on the intelligence, but the political hand-wringing actually misses an important point. We've demonstrated our military superiority. If we want, we can own the skies over Iran. If the Iranians don't abandon their nuclear program, we can hit them again, and Iran's remaining leaders should take the off-ramp the President has offered them. Finally, I'll ask you to explain for us the lessons you're taking from conflict in Ukraine and the Middle East. How has the rapid evolution of unmanned systems informed the decisions you make about drone operations, force protection, and interception? And what information are you getting today that you'd lose if America neglected its relationships with force-multiplying allies and partners? Look forward to your testimony on each of these fronts in a moment, but first, Senator Kim.