As the mission approaches the conclusion of its first year — with at least two more to go, unless the president says otherwise — its measure of success depends on whom you ask. In a round-table discussion with reporters Monday, Brig. Gen. Leland Blanchard, the D.C. National Guard’s interim commanding general, suggested the impact of the Guard’s presence was as much about an increased feeling of safety as it was about the number of interventions.

Those numbers, in the context of the size of the Guard deployment, are modest. Blanchard said Guardsmen had provided 788 medical assists, “ranging from administering CPR to applying tourniquets for gunshot victims;” reunited 43 lost children, intervened in 262 fights to prevent further escalation; and administered the overdose reversal drug Narcan to 325 people. Guard members supported law enforcement 479 times, he said, or a little more than once per day over the course of a year-long deployment.

“Those are not simply numbers. Those are not just data points,” Blanchard said. “Each of those represents fathers, mothers, children, people who have received emergency care, been returned to parents, and families, had their lives saved from opioid overdoses, or were involved in violent situations brought under control before further harm was done.”

He added that a Guard team on a “ride the rail” mission on the D.C. Metro had stopped a sexual assault in progress and recently intervened to stop a knife-wielding would-be assailant.

Blanchard said the Guard members’ presence was having its own impact. Guard troops recently began patrolling Starburst Plaza, a well-known hub for drug activity in northeast D.C. During a visit to the area Aug. 1, he said, he observed an Air National Guard member administering Narcan and “saving a life on the scene.”

“A few minutes later, a young teenager rode by on his scooter, stopped, and said, ‘I’ve never seen this place so clean,’” Blanchard said.

It remains unclear, however, how lasting those changes will be – or whether the impact justifies the missions’s cost. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated the cost of the D.C. deployment to be $55 million per month. Based on the Guard’s reported Narcan administrations, that amounts to more than $2 million in costs for every overdose reversal. A new estimate provided this week to the office of Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., estimates the mission will cost another $1.4 billion through its expected conclusion in January 2029, when Trump is slated to leave office.

Plans to move the Guard members from hotels into apartments via a $292 million contract awarded in July to corporate lodging company Placemakr are set to save the Guard about $90 million, Blanchard said, adding that they’ll also allow troops to be “closer and more responsive” to their mission areas.

There are currently just over 4,600 Guard troops in D.C., Blanchard said, and that number is expected to decrease somewhat as summer and 250th anniversary events come to a close.

A May study from the nonpartisan think tank Niskanen Center found that the Guard deployment correlated with a sharp decrease in specific kinds of crime, including vehicle theft and other opportunistic property crime in high-visibility spaces. But robberies and other violent crime trends stayed constant, it showed.

“The implication is sharp,” the study found. “The National Guard deployment appears to have deterred opportunistic property offending, exactly the category of crime most sensitive to visible, high-presence enforcement on the street. Violent crime was unmoved.”

Asked about recent reports, Blanchard said the report showed “there’s a positive impact where the Guard is on crime,” though the study authors “disagree with some of the locations” where the Guard has spent its time.

“As we move forward, what we’ll do is bring the same impact that we’re seeing,” he said, citing the recent move into Starburst Plaza.

“We have definitely seen a significant impact there,” Blanchard added. “I think we’re going to continue to bring that impact across the city as we expand.”

The Guard is now moving into its next phase of the D.C. mission, Blanchard said. While he provided few details about what the phase would entail, he mentioned specific higher-crime metro areas, including D.C.’s Ward 8 and Trinidad neighborhood.

“We’ll still be downtown, and we’ll still be in the neighborhoods that we’re in right now,” he said. “We’ll just shift some of those resources, and again, working in coordination with federal law enforcement and the Metropolitan Police Department, reallocate and repurpose some of those personnel.”

But on July 15, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a bill that includes $500 million in Foreign Military Financing for Taiwan, one in a chain of Pacific Rim allies that U.S. officials have long seen as a buffer against Chinese military expansion.

While the half-billion-dollar allocation in the 2027 fiscal year appropriations bill does not commit money to a particular arms package, analysts say it’s a sign that the Republican Party-dominated Congress values the defense of Taiwan in case China ever attacks with its larger armed forces, and that Washington intends to fulfill at least older arms purchase deals.

“This $500 million Foreign Military Funding demonstrates that Congress has not reduced its security support for Taiwan following the Trump-Xi meeting and reflects Congress’s desire to avoid long-term constraints on military aid to Taiwan due to White House negotiations with China through appropriations and delivery requirements,” said Huang Chung-ting, associate research fellow with the Institute for National Defense and Security Research in Taipei.

Trump’s signature, needed to pass the appropriations bill, would imply continued weapons sales of some kind despite the unknown fate of the $14 billion package, analysts said.

Foreign Military Financing – usually grants or loans – for U.S. allies abroad may technically go toward acquiring weapons, military training or other related services.

“Foreign military financing concerns how weapons are ultimately paid for but not whether the weapons are actually sold or transferred in the first place,” said Sean King, vice president of New York-based political consultancy Park Strategies.

Trump has not ostensibly withdrawn any previous but unfulfilled U.S. arms sales for Taiwan, meaning that the proposed congressional funding could go toward one of those, experts say. U.S. arms sales to Taiwan date back more than four decades and can take years before payments and delivery dates are settled. As of April, sales of 30 individual weapon types were partly unfulfilled, according to the Taiwan Security Monitor research initiative of the George Mason University’s Schar School of Policy and Government.

The most recent items appear in a $11.1 billion batch of weaponry fully approved by Washington in December. It includes M109A7 self-propelled howitzers, the high mobility artillery rocket system HIMARS, Javelin anti-tank missiles and unmanned attack aircraft systems. Taiwan’s Cabinet approved its own special budget in May to help pay for the purchases.

“My assessment is that while there was indeed a political pause after the Trump-Xi meeting, it was not a complete halt to arms sales to Taiwan, but rather (it) targeted new cases that had not yet received approval,” Huang said.

“This delay likely involved Trump’s negotiations with China, a review of weapons stockpiles and internal White House scrutiny, and cannot be explained by a single reason,” he said.

The appropriations bill still requires U.S. Senate review before it would go to Trump’s office.

China claims sovereignty over self-ruled Taiwan and has threatened to take the island by force, if needed. Over the past four years the People’s Liberation Army has increased the frequency of military exercises near Taiwan, often in the 160km (100 miles) strait separating them.

Trump said after his meeting with the Chinese president that withholding the arms deal was a “good negotiating chip.” But in June, the U.S. State Department reiterated long-standing policy that arms sales to Taiwan were not dependent on Beijing’s consent.

Experts anticipate a White House announcement on the $14 billion arms package only after Trump and Xi meet in September in the United States, as announced by Washington.

“It may be that Trump is delaying a public announcement until after Xi’s visit to avoid being the skunk who came to the garden party,” said Doug Barry, a professor at The George Washington University and a former communications director with the U.S.-China Business Council.

“It’s odd there has been no public announcement,” he said.

Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. John Caine testified before the Senate Appropriations Committee to seek $67.1 billion in supplemental money for the war and other DoD expenses, such as munitions, drones and the Army and National Guard deployments to the southern U.S. border and Washington, D.C.

Given that the department has $75 billion in its coffers from the $156 billion it received last year in reconciliation funding in the One Big Beautiful Bill, senators voiced skepticism over the emergency request.

Sen. Patty Murray of Washington, the committee’s top Democrat, said the committee would not “rubber stamp a request to bankroll this war,” given that the DoD received more than $1 trillion in funding last year and has requested $1.3 trillion this year.

“The president’s request is not even a primarily a request to cover the costs of the Iran war. This request is chock full of asks to fund unrelated DoD priorities, which should be considered through our annual appropriations process, not in an emergency supplemental,” the senator said.

Similarly, Sen. Kristin Gillibrand, D-N.Y., asked how to convey the DoD’s needs when constituents have seen gas prices, food and other household expenses rise.

“You’re asking for $1.5 trillion, unlimited money for bombs, but insufficient money for the American people for their healthcare, their food, their housing,” Gillibrand said.

Hegseth said the new funding is needed to support operations because the $75 billion in reconciliation funds are slated to be used to restore a military that was “ignored” under the Biden administration. The new request is an “urgent, necessary injection of resources to address” immediate needs, he said.

“The military requires a generational investment to deliver on peace through strength,” Hegseth said, later adding that he didn’t know what his predecessor, former Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, “did for four years.”

“The amount of neglect, the amount of stale thinking and bureaucracy was staggering when we took over,” Hegseth said.

He added that the supplemental was “a new request based on new realities of a world we face.”

“[We’re] stepping up to meet the moment,” Hegseth said.

In May, Hegseth estimated that the cost of war at the time was $29 billion.

Roughly half of the supplemental request, $32.7 billion, is slated to fund the ongoing operation directly. The remainder is for national security priorities not related to the war.

The request includes $21 billion for munitions, $17.3 billion for operations, $12.1 billion for classified programs, $5.1 billion for cybersecurity, $2.4 billion for drones, $1.7 billion for readiness, $1.5 billion for fuel and $2 billion for “administration priorities” and National Guard support.

The request comes as the war, which began Feb. 28, has escalated in the past two weeks. The U.S. has conducted air strikes consecutively for the last 10 days, and four U.S. service members have been killed in the last four days, bringing the total number of U.S. casualties to 18.

At least 14 merchant mariners also have died as a result of attacks in the Strait of Hormuz, according to the International Maritime Organization, and transits have decreased dramatically as Iran has reasserted its control over the strategic waterway.

Caine told senators he sat before them asking for the funding “while the window of opportunity — while time — is still on our side.”

“Our adversaries are aligning in their interests, creating simultaneous challenges across multiple domains. They are sharing intelligence, combat capabilities and technology. Technology. That is accelerating the speed of war, isn’t it?” Caine said in opening remarks.

Of concern to Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., and several other senators, was the administration’s approach to the Russia-Ukraine war and funding promised to support Ukraine that has not been allocated. Kennedy wanted assurances that the DoD had chosen a clear side in the conflict, asking Caine who “we” wanted to win.

“Sir, I want Ukraine to win,” Caine said.

“Is Russia America’s friend?” Kennedy asked.

“I think that depends on your definition of friend. I think it’s a complicated relationship,” Caine replied. After a brief pause, he added, “But no, I don’t think they’re our friends.”

Kennedy also asked what the administration thinks will happen regarding the Strait of Hormuz and what Iran’s intentions are in developing a nuclear weapon — the initial reason President Donald Trump gave for attacking Iran.

“We need straight answers!” Kennedy told Hegseth.

Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska sought assurances that should the supplemental request be approved, the Trump administration would not perceive passage as a measure for restarting the 60-day clock on a War Powers Resolution, which the Senate passed 50-48 in June.

Citing precedent by President Bill Clinton in sending U.S. troops to Kosovo, Murkowski asked if the administration felt it had adequate authorization to continue the conflict in Iran.

“We certainly, as department, take the position of the White House that we have all the authorities necessary at this moment,” Hegseth said.

Two lawmakers, Sen. Tammy Baldwin, D-Wisc., and Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W. Va., asked Hegseth to answer for the record, to concerns that service members injured in the current conflict did not receive proper medical care from the U.S. military or screenings for traumatic brain injury.

As of Tuesday, more than 440 troops have been injured in the conflict.

“Every effort was made to provide every level of medical care possible,” Hegseth said.

The move would be a massive gesture from Trump to Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan whom he considers a close ally and would remove a major long-standing irritant in bilateral ties.

Even as Washington and Ankara have enjoyed warmer ties under Trump, Turkey’s 2019 acquisition of the Russian S-400 system has long been a sore point for both sides.

In response to that purchase, Washington in 2020 imposed sanctions on a major Turkish defense company and removed Turkey from the F-35 stealth fighter jet program, where Ankara was also a production partner.

“We’re going to be taking the sanctions off,” Trump told reporters just before his meeting with Erdogan during a visit to Turkey for a NATO summit. He added that his secretary of state and Treasury secretary were working on the issue.

Trump was also upbeat about the possible sale of F-35 stealth fighter jets to Turkey even as he did not say how exactly such a transaction would take place given the legal hurdles.

“Turkey has been, in many ways, much more loyal than other countries that we think would be loyal. … It’s a great plane, it’s the best, currently the best plane by far. And it’s certainly something we will consider,” Trump said.

Congress passed a law prohibiting any F-35 sales to ​Turkey as long ⁠as Ankara retained the S-400s, saying the Russian system posed a security risk to U.S.-made combat aircraft. Currently, the U.S. law does not permit Turkey to operate or possess the S-400 system if it wishes to rejoin the F-35 program.

Earlier, two sources familiar with the matter told Reuters that Trump was expected to throw his support behind a potential F-35 sale to Turkey. One solution that has in recent weeks gained traction is to send the Russian system to a third country, although an agreement on this has yet to be sealed, according to the sources, who requested anonymity to discuss sensitive matters.

It was unclear if such a move would be accepted by Russia, which requires end-user obligations in weapons sales.

Trump’s visit to Turkey is the first by a U.S. president in 11 years. He was welcomed by Erdogan with a lavish state ceremony and both leaders sang each other’s praises in their public remarks. Under Trump, Turkey’s deteriorating human rights track record has never been a topic of much concern for Washington.

The maneuver surfaced in a Wednesday report accompanying the House Appropriations Committee’s fiscal 2027 defense bill, and it runs on money the White House went looking for a week earlier.

In a June 17 budget amendment to House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., the Office of Management and Budget asked Congress to steer more than $1.55 billion into the Air Force’s research and development account to keep the airborne battle management jet alive — money the service had left out of its original request after the Pentagon moved to cancel the program just a year ago.

Getting there required two cuts and one deposit.

OMB carved about $651 million from the Navy account that buys the E-2D Hawkeye and $899 million from the Air Force’s other procurement account. It funneled the combined sum into Air Force research, development, test and evaluation.

The House report pins the Air Force half on the Special Update Program, one of the service’s classified procurement lines.

The justification ran identically across all three amendments: The money would “deliver two E-7 Wedgetail prototype aircraft and continue Engineering Manufacturing and Development activities for a program of record.”

The Air Force already has seven E-7s on contract, including two rapid prototypes and five more added under a March modification. However, all are developmental jets meant to prove out the U.S. design before any production decision, which is why the money lands in research and development rather than procurement.

The committee pointed to the war in Iran to make its case.

“The conflict in Iran has reinforced the need for the Air Force to maintain a credible airborne battle management capability, currently being met with the Air Force’s E–3 Airborne Warning and Control System and the Navy’s E–2D Hawkeye programs,” the committee wrote. “As the E–3 is set to retire, the E–7 Wedgetail will serve as modern replacement for lost battle management capability.”

Panel pushes back on taking Hawkeye money

The Hawkeye money, though, was not OMB’s to spend. The House panel backed the E-7 realignment but rejected the Navy offset, restoring the $651 million the White House had taken from the Hawkeye program.

“While the committee wholly supports the E–7 program and funding realignment, the Committee also restored the E–2D program to six aircraft for fiscal year 2027,” the report states. “The committee understands the operational necessity of the E–2D platform; the complementary nature of the E–2D and E–7; and believes that more aircraft, not fewer, are necessary to support our warfighters now and in the future.”

For all the money in motion, it buys prototypes and development work, not a Wedgetail fleet. Lawmakers want to know what comes next.

The report orders the Air Force secretary to brief the House and Senate defense appropriations subcommittees, alongside the 2028 request, on “the full E–7 acquisition strategy, to include required quantity; funding requirements across the future years defense program; and schedules for development and production.”

Prior to the war in Iran, the Air Force wanted to scrap the E-7 program, a platform already flying with Australia, the U.K. and other allies, after an Air Force official said its per-aircraft cost had climbed from $588 million to $724 million, and amid doubts about whether it could survive in contested airspace.

The previous plan was to lean on extra E-2Ds and a future of space-based sensors instead.

The war with Iran undercut that case, exposing a near-term battle management gap that satellites cannot yet fill, compelling the Pentagon to reverse course this spring.

The supplemental funding request, posted on the White House website and transmitted to Congress, includes $67.15 billion for the military, in addition to some $1 trillion appropriated last year and another $1.5 trillion Trump wants for next year.

The White House said the latest funding request is to cover operational costs of the Iran war, including for military personnel and readiness, operational costs to rebuild weapons stocks, and classified programs.

The funding request for the military includes $21 billion to procure munitions, strengthen the U.S. industrial base and support critical capabilities.

Senate joins House in vote to halt Iran war

The U.S. Senate passed a war powers resolution on Tuesday directing Trump to halt military action against Iran, weeks after the measure passed the House, as a handful of Trump’s fellow Republicans in both chambers joined almost every Democrat in a rebuke to Trump.

During a lunch at the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday, Trump got into a shouting match over the war with Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, one of the Republicans who voted in favor of the resolution.

The supplemental request immediately met resistance. Both Republican and Democratic lawmakers have complained since the U.S. and Israel began bombing Iran on February 28 that Trump and his team have not kept them informed about the conflict or his plans.

Additionally, lawmakers have noted that the U.S. Constitution gives Congress, not the president, the right to send troops into war, and accuse Trump of disregarding that separation of powers.

Tough vote for Republicans as midterms loom

Republicans could face a difficult vote for the request, given the war’s deep unpopularity and only months remaining until midterm elections in November that will determine whether they retain control of Congress.

Democrats also accuse Trump of ignoring the needs of Americans who have been grappling with a steep rise in fuel and food prices since the fighting began. “We should be lowering costs for the American people, not writing another blank check for Trump,” Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer posted on X after Congress received the request.

Senator Patty Murray of Washington, the top Democrat on the chamber’s appropriations committee, said she would review the request to ensure that servicemembers are taken care of, “but I will not rubber-stamp tens of billions more for this disastrous war of choice.”

Trump’s Republicans hold such slim margins in the House and Senate that appropriations bills typically need Democratic support to pass.

The supplemental budget request also includes some $1.4 billion to address the Ebola outbreak in Africa, including $800 million in international humanitarian assistance and $500 million for global health security to prevent, detect and respond to the outbreak.

“This funding is critical to protect Americans, and stop the spread to the United States,” the White House said.

The administration made steep cuts to the U.S. Agency for International Development and to African public health ​efforts prior to the outbreak.

The spending request is also seeking $11.1 billion to support U.S. farmers and $1 billion to boost the pensions of workers at former General Motors auto parts unit Delphi, which were cut during the Detroit automaker’s 2009 bankruptcy restructuring.

The White House is also asking for $500 million to support construction projects in and around Washington and $1 billion to assist reconstructing New York’s Penn Station.

The Senate Armed Services Committee included a provision in its version of fiscal year 2027 National Defense Authorization Act that would reduce funding for Hegseth’s travel to no more than 25% until the committee receives what lawmakers describe as overdue reports and supporting documents.

The committee approved its version of the NDAA last week in an 18-9 vote, sending the bill to the full Senate. House lawmakers advanced their version the week prior.

The provision cuts Hegseth’s travel funding by 75% until the committee receives the civilian harm investigations for three separate 2025 Yemen strikes and the February strike on the girls’ school in Minab, Iran.

On Feb. 28, the first day of the Iran war, a school in southern Iran was struck by a U.S. Tomahawk cruise missile, killing at least 165 people, most of them schoolgirls.

President Donald Trump claimed that Iran could have obtained the missile, despite questions about how Tehran would have gained access. The strike has been under investigation by the Pentagon since March.

Speaking on Wednesday in France, Trump was asked about the investigation and whether anyone in the Trump administration would be held accountable.

“It’s such a strange question to be asked at this state because you’re talking about a long time ago, but nobody did that on purpose,” he said in response.

“Mistakes are made. War is nasty. But I know it’s under investigation, and I could have a report for you tomorrow. I would ask Pete Hegseth that question because they have it under investigation,” he concluded.

Another provision in the Senate NDAA moved to prohibit the use of military funds for the operations against Iran without congressional authorization and restricted travel funding for Hegseth’s office until lawmakers submit a report on how the Iran war has impacted readiness. The amendment failed to pass in a 13-14 vote.

Unedited video of strikes conducted by U.S. Southern Command on terrorist organizations that were allegedly smuggling drugs in Latin American waters would also need to be submitted.

Since September 2025, the U.S. military has conducted strikes on vessels in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean that they alleged were carrying drugs.

As of June 16, the military has disclosed 64 strikes that have killed at least 191 people.

The committee is also seeking information about the Defense Department procedures for notifying Congress about sensitive military operations.

Lawmakers have previously criticized Hegseth over congressional oversight following reports that a special operations team attacked survivors of an alleged drug-smuggling vessel strike off Venezuela’s coast in September 2025.

Hegseth refused to publicly release footage of the attack, instead only showing members of the House and Senate Armed Services Committee.

The provision would also require the unredacted investigation by U.S. Special Operations Command into Operation Absolution Resolve, the U.S. military operation executed on Jan. 20 to capture Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

Senate lawmakers also requested a certification that shows contractor support for clandestine and intelligence activities and a report on support to Ukraine required under last year’s NDAA.

A portion of the U.S. Air Force’s budget is set aside for the purchase of aviation fuel based on a predicted fuel price and an increase in flying hours for fiscal 2027, but that cost was estimated and submitted in their budget request before the war began, Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., said on Thursday at a Senate Committee on Armed Services hearing.

“My understanding is the president’s budget submitted to us did not include any costs that were costs related to the Iran war because it had largely been prepared and submitted through this budgetary chain of command before the Iran war started,” Kaine, a committee member, said in the hearing.

At the hearing on the department’s posture related to fiscal 2027’s defense authorization request, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Kenneth Wilsbach said that the service did account for the increased cost of flying hours in the request and estimated that cost before the market determined the true cost.

“Some years it’s more, some years it’s less. So we will adjust our dollars if we end up having to pay more per dollar for a gallon of fuel if it ends up being more than we assessed,” Wilsbach said.

Aviation fuel costs are not an issue unique to the Air Force even though it is the largest consumer across the federal government. All branches of the U.S. military utilize aviation fuel to manage and operate their own drones, helicopters and aircraft fleets.

Kaine said that aviation fuel costs have increased roughly 50% since the war started on Feb. 28 and that while writing fiscal 2027’s NDAA, the committee needs to deal with the new reality of costs on the commercial side, given its effects on the American people.

At the pump, gas prices have surged around $1.50, making the national average about $4.50 since the war commenced. Commercially, U.S. airlines fuel cost increased by 56.4%, or $3.23 billion, since February, according to the Bureau of Transportation.

Wilsbach said the force assumed a 10% increase in flying hours costs from last year in this upcoming fiscal year budget.

The force’s budget requests funding for 1.1 million flying hours, which is considered the “maximum executable level for the total force,” and allots $9.9 billion for the flying hour program, which includes aviation fuel among other maintenance and operation items.

Wilsbach did not indicate what is the assumed cost per gallon of PB, which is a Propane-Butane liquid gas blend commonly used by the Air Force for field operations.

He said that the Air Force department had long-term contracts for fuel purchases and now has storage built up, so the specifics can’t be known until that storage runs dry. Kaine pressed on whether that 10% increase is deemed sufficient considering the rise in costs.

“It’s hard to say at this point, but what I’ll tell you is this is routine for us,” Wilsbach said.

“Every year, the cost of flying hours changes from the time we budget for it to the time we execute it, and we work it out with moving money around in various accounts to cover down on the cost,” he continued.

When posed by Kaine on if the potential cost is being considered in preparation of a possible supplemental bill, Secretary of the Air Force Troy Meink said that it depends on how long these costs stay high to determine their corresponding impact.

Meink said that in a previous hearing, Jay Hurst, who is performing the duties of Pentagon comptroller, mentioned the country is facing about a $29 billion impact, which includes some operation and maintenance fuel cost.

By the end of 2026, it is estimated that the American public will have paid over $193 billion in excess fuel costs because of the Iran war. As of today, American consumers have already paid $40 billion more for fuel.

Kaine highlighted these estimates, saying that it demonstrates the challenge families are facing now.

“I suspect as we’re looking at the military budget, we’re going to see a similar need to adjust it pretty dramatically because of fuel costs,” Kaine concluded.

The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform held a hearing on the DoD years-long struggle to produce a clean financial audit despite claiming around half of the government’s discretionary spending.

Congress passed a measure as part of the 2024 National Defense Authorization Act that requires the DoD to produce a clean audit by Dec. 31, 2028. “Clean” means a clear enough accounting of the military’s assets, what was budgeted and spent, along with evidence and documentation, so that the Government Accountability Office can make an accurate assessment of the entire federal government’s finances.

The Marine Corps has been the only service to pass an audit since 2018, when it was first mandated to conduct a full audit. To date, the DoD has never passed a full, clean audit, according to the GAO.

Over the course of Wednesday’s hearing, both the members of the subcommittee on government operations and some of the witnesses had some concern about the department’s ability to pull it off.

“That’s a standard that every other large [government] agency is able to meet, and meet regularly,” Rep. Kweisi Mfume, D-Md., said in his opening remarks.

Knowing that the Pentagon has failed to deliver on that, Mfume said he could not vote for the proposed massive increase to DoD’s budget — from around $901 billion for fiscal 2026 to $1.5 trillion for fiscal 2027.

In 2024, the committee instituted a new system for the DoD’s auditing process, which follows a rubric or scorecard. Since that strategy was implemented, committee chairman Pete Sessions, R-Texas, said, “Progress was made but not enough to ensure full financial transparency and accountability. Financial transparency and accountability are core principles of good government.”

The underlying problems, as both Sessions and Asif Khan, director of the GAO, pointed out, are the internal accounting, budget and expenditure mechanisms across the DoD.

This is not a new issue; in fact, it has been going on for 30 years, according to Khan’s pre-hearing witness testimony.

“In 1995, GAO designated DoD financial management as a high-risk area because of pervasive weaknesses in its financial management systems, business processes, internal controls, corrective action plans, acquisition management and financial monitoring and reporting,” the testimony reads. “In 2025, we expanded DoD’s financial management high-risk area to include fraud risk management.”

That potential for fraud rises with a budget increase like the one proposed, one witness said.

“Any time there is an influx of cash or funds into any organization, the likelihood of increased risk of fraud, waste, and abuse coincides with that,” Brett Mansfield, deputy inspector general for audit in DoD’s Office of the Inspector General.

“I’m not sure if it’s a one-for-one [but] there is definitely a positive relationship between an influx of funds and the increased risks,” he added.

Dubbed “Deal Team Six,” the crew is tasked with creating better deals with defense companies to ensure their production of U.S. military equipment is not at the expense of the taxpayer, but that of the contractor, according to a Thursday social media video posted by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth.

Hegseth claims in the video that for decades, the department allowed contractors to “double-dip” when service members needed weapons, aircraft or ships, charging the taxpayer for factory builds and again for the final product.

“Despite paying companies to make weapons faster, scheduled delays were constant and cost overruns were the norm, all while their CEOs got rich,” Hegseth says in the video.

Deal Team Six, which is folded inside the Pentagon’s Economic Defense Unit, stood up in early April after it was introduced by Hegseth in a November 2025 memorandum that referred to the unit as a way to modernize contracting and provide incentives and possible penalties to industry partners.

Hegseth has sought to revamp the defense industrial base by scrapping the Defense Acquisition System and turning it into a Warfighting Acquisition System, designated the “arsenal of freedom.” The new system is meant to speed up project timelines and increase production.

In a November 2025 speech at the National War College at Fort McNair in D.C., Hegseth announced that the department would grant larger and longer contracts to companies for systems that have shown their merit.

In exchange for the companies to foot the bill for certain items — such as expansion efforts, new factories, assembly lines and factory plants — the department will provide “steady, long-term orders” for what the service members need, Hegseth’s recent video explains.

This is meant to guarantee that these defense companies can create equipment in higher volumes faster, while keeping to a flat price. Hegseth warned in the video that if companies don’t comply, the department will simply find others who will.

“We’re not tolerating delays in production or cost overruns anymore,” Hegseth says in the video.

“We’ve pushed out the bureaucrats who have made these deals in the past and replaced them with the most talented negotiators in the private sector,” he continued.

This unit was included in fiscal year 2026’s National Defense Authorization Act and appropriated more than $266 million for research, development, test and evaluation.

Included in President Donald Trump’s fiscal year 2027 $1.5 trillion defense budget, the unit is allotted over $593 million in the same type of funding section as the 2026 fiscal year.

Although the team’s entire roster has not yet been revealed, George Kollitides, the former head of defense at Cerberus Capital Management, was named its director, according to Wall Street Journal reporting.