U.S. Representative Mike Rogers (R-AL), Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, delivered the following opening remarks at a hearing on the Department of the Navy's Fiscal Year 2025 (FY25) budget request.
Chairman Rogers' remarks as prepared for delivery:
Today we complete our FY25 budget and posture hearings with the Department of the Navy.
I want to thank the Ranking Member and all the Members for their cooperation, hard work, and dedication as we worked through 26 hearings in 13 legislative days.
These hearings have helped provide the information we need to markup the FY25 NDAA later this month.
I also want to thank our witnesses for being here and for their service to our nation.
Admiral, this is the first time you're appearing before us. Congratulations on your confirmation as the first female CNO and thank you for being here.
General, this is your first appearance as well. We are all thankful for your speedy recovery and pleased you're back leading our Marines.
And Secretary Del Toro, it's good to have you back before us again as well.
The President is requesting a one percent increase for the Department the Navy.
Factoring in inflation, that amounts to a two percent cut.
Just as with the other services, a budget that fails to provide real growth means the Navy had to make painful tradeoffs and absorb real risk in their current and future readiness.
We're seeing that very acutely in the request for shipbuilding.
The President is seeking to build a paltry 6 battle force ships in FY25.
At the same time, he wants to retire 19.
Ten of those ships have several years of service life remaining.
These retirements represent a huge loss of capability.
And they leave us with a fleet of 287 in FY25.
Under the Navy's plan, the fleet will further drop down to 280 in FY27.
Forget about the 500 ship Navy many say we need to counter China.
At no point over the next 20 years does the size of the fleet even reach the 381 ships needed to support the National Defense Strategy.
The budget also cuts the buy for the Virginia class submarine below the two per year needed to fulfill our AUKUS commitment.
I don't see how cutting the size of our fleet and shorting our AUKUS commitment will deter China.
I also fail to see how it will provide the stability needed to revitalize our industrial base.
I am also concerned about the recent findings of the Navy's 45-day shipbuilding review.
It is entirely unacceptable that nearly every single major shipbuilding program is experiencing significant schedule delays.
We expect the Navy to provide us with a detailed plan to address these delays as soon as possible.
One possible solution would be for the Navy to stop piling on new requirements and changing ship designs in the middle of procurements.
As we've seen with the frigate program, that only leads to ballooning costs and late deliveries.
Cutting the buys for new ships, delaying deliveries, and decommissioning ships before the end of their service lives will place significant additional stress on readiness of the fleet.
That's a big problem for two reasons.
First, the fleet is already suffering with readiness issues.
Maintenance availabilities are taking much longer than planned, inhibiting our ability to project power.
The Marines have experienced that first hand when maintenance issues with the USS Boxer delayed the return of the Bataan Amphibious Ready Group earlier this year.
And last year, maintenance issues meant there wasn't an Amphibious Ready Group available to evacuate Americans from Sudan.
The second problem is that the Navy is currently carrying out operations at a much higher than planned tempo.
The Navy is quickly using up missiles, burning through fuel, and extending deployments as it defends the Red Sea and Israel from Iran's terrorist proxies.
I don't see the security environment improving in the Middle East any time soon, so I'd like to hear from our witnesses how they expect to continue to carry out these operations with a smaller budget.
Finally, I'd like to hear from the Commandant on the progress he's making with Force Design.
Preparing our Marines to be successful in a potential conflict with China is critically important.
