| Speaker | Time | Text |
|---|---|---|
|
unidentified
|
I yield back my time, Mr. Chair. | |
| Gentlelady yields back her time. | ||
| The Dean of the House, Chairman Rogers. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Chairman. | ||
| Welcome, gentlemen and lady. | ||
| Let me ask you about the stunning success of the Ukrainian drones of last week. | ||
| Are we seeing the ushering in of a new era of warfare, the use of drones from afar? | ||
| After all, these drones were smuggled into Russia, hidden for a great span of time, and then activated from 2,500 miles away. | ||
| Are we prepared both defensively and offensively? | ||
| Mr. Secretary. | ||
| I'll answer that and then maybe hand it to the chairman. | ||
| I would say, sir, it was a daring and very effective operation that we were not aware of in advance and reflects significant advancements in drone warfare, which we are tracking in real time inside Ukraine and taking that feedback to help us better understand how we can better produce more lethal, attritable drones, but also advance our counter-UAS systems so that we're not vulnerable to a threat and an attack like that. | ||
| The Chairman and I got together right after seeing that and saying what more can we do to ensure we're prepared and our country's defensible against something like that. | ||
| But I'll hand to the chairman. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Mr. Secretary, Congressman, thank you for the question. | |
| I think it goes to your more strategic question about is the way and nature that we're fighting our wars changing, sir. | ||
|
unidentified
|
The answer is likely yes. | |
| Mass numbers of rounds moving back and forth with precision and autonomy are all things that are advancing in the technology trend exponentially. | ||
| One of the things that I've talked to some of the leaders of this community and committee about are buying capabilities along the technology curve or ahead of it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And so I do think it was a bold move and it represents a new and different way of fighting wars as we've seen over the past few years in that particular fight, sir. | |
| What do we need to do to protect ourselves from a similar type of raid by an adversary? | ||
| Well, sir, intelligence is critical. | ||
| Human intelligence signals intelligence, every aspect of how we get ahead, get to the left of a problem like that. | ||
| And certainly our department in conjunction, interagency, are focused on that. | ||
| But then it's rapidly fielding the commercially available technologies in some cases, but others proprietary, whether they're EW, whether they're microwave, whether they're kinetic, to defeat drones either individually or in swarms in multiple locations against, you know, protecting our people, protecting our installations, protecting our critical infrastructure, protecting our bombers. | ||
| And some of that speaks to Golden Dome and what we'll do there, but you also have the particulars of the immediate. | ||
| Our forward-deployed troops, are they properly covered by counter-UAS systems? | ||
| Do we have the best systems forward-deployed? | ||
| And that's something we're looking at every single day. | ||
| We live in a dynamic operating environment, and we are, it is, the chairman knows this, the deputy, our policy shop, we are focused on ensuring that this is front and center considering how central this threat will be going forward. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, these are low-cost, high-tech weapons, if you will. | |
| And has been dominated by China. | ||
| 90% of drones are produced by China, I'm told. | ||
| What does that tell us about what we need to do here at home? | ||
| Well, sir, it's not just, first of all, making sure we're less reliant on Chinese technology and any part of the supply chain, which is something we can speak to because that's been an aggressive part of our effort at DOD. | ||
| But also recognizing it's not just China. | ||
| Of course, Iran invests substantially in drone capabilities. | ||
| And then learning a lot from partners on our side, like the Ukrainians, who have developed systems and fielding that quickly. | ||
| So commercially available, attributable, that we can produce at home is important to us. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Congratulations to all three of you, and we wish you well. | |
| I yield back. | ||
| Thank you, sir. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank the gentleman for a question. | |
| Real quickly, is the press story accurate that 40% of the long-range bombers from Russia were destroyed in that attack? | ||
| Is that an accurate number? | ||
| Sir, I'm not exactly sure what the percentage is, but I also know that I may not say that in open session. | ||
| So I'll take that and get back to you through appropriate channels. | ||
| Thanks, gentlemen. | ||
| Ms. Captor. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Chairman. | ||
| We welcome our guests. | ||
| I come from a family of combat veterans going back a long time. | ||
| And my comment is the use of certain words and what they imply. | ||
| When I hear warrior ethos, and I hear it a lot from you, Mr. Secretary, I'm concerned. | ||
| All the soldiers in our family, all of whom fought and received medals for their combat service, call themselves soldiers. | ||
| Marines are trained to kill. | ||
| In terms of domestic policing, our police and our National Guard at the state level, carefully used, but also our state police are used in civil enforcement, and they are good. | ||
| I don't need any reply. | ||
| I just am concerned about what those words you often utter actually do in people's minds and change the language we have used since the founding of this republic. | ||
| So I just, that is a concern of mine. | ||
| I wanted to go to the general and chairman, if I could. | ||
| We've heard a lot this morning about defense industrial base. | ||
| And this is something I ran for office on a long time ago. | ||
| We have not made significant progress as a country in this regard. | ||
| And the places that made things, whether they were machine tools, whether it was composite materials, were left behind. | ||
| It's one of the reasons for the division in our society. | ||
| So I am very interested in knowing what specifically and in which accounts, and I hope you can get this back to us within a week and a half, you are going to focus on in order to inject additional resources in the defense industrial base of this country. | ||
| What will that look like? | ||
| We are just successful now in helping steel to revive in some of our composite metals. | ||
| 40 years ago, I wrote a title to the defense bill dealing with strategic metals. | ||
| Nobody at the Department of Defense cared, okay? | ||
| So I'm interested in which accounts, if you could kindly get back to me on that, and what, when you say defense industrial base, budget-wise, in which accounts, what does that mean? | ||
| All right? | ||
| I don't expect you to answer it now. | ||
| Can you tell me when you might get that information back to us? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, ma'am, you just said a week and a half, so I know the awesome humans behind me are scribbling madly to come back to that. | |
| Can I just make a quick comment? | ||
| You know, I happen to be a lucky guy that served in the private sector for a while, and I ran a machine shop in Texas along with a metal finishing business. | ||
| So, when we talk about defense industrial base, I broaden that out to really the national industrial base. | ||
| There are certain components that are made in the defense side, but as you articulate, ma'am, many others are made in the small machine shops out around this entire nation. | ||
| When I talk about mobilizing our nation, I think of that national, not just defense industrial base. | ||
| What do we have to do to create greater capacity all the way down the chain to include jobs at the local level for those people that build quality parts and deliver on time with shorter lead time and lower cost? | ||
|
unidentified
|
And so, I have great empathy for what you're talking about, and we'll get back to you just as soon as we can. | |
| Yes, and General and Secretary, going back to the drone attack in Ukraine, a country that was invaded by the Russian dictatorship starting in 2014, they've been at war for a decade, more than a decade. | ||
| What they've done with drones is astounding. | ||
| It's going to change warfare. | ||
| One of my questions is: what are you doing to establish relations with Ukraine and not turn your back on them as an administration and help them win, help Liberty win? | ||
| This has implications way beyond the boundaries of Ukraine. | ||
| Russia's got 11 time zones. | ||
| I mean, this is the most important test of liberty for our NATO alliance in my lifetime, and we better help win. | ||
| And that involves moving forward faster on drone technology. | ||
| I'm very worried about our air bases where we have secure assets. | ||
| Mr. Secretary, can we defend them today if they were to have a similar attack? | ||
| We're certainly very focused on that, ma'am. | ||
| And we're learning every day from Ukraine. | ||
| I think we would need to clarify what win means. | ||
| This president is committed to peace. | ||
| He's committed to stopping the killing. | ||
| And he was not in office when it started in 2014. | ||
| There were no additional incursions in his first term. | ||
| And then, under the previous administration, Vladimir Putin sought to take Ukraine. | ||
| We're committed, this administration is committed, to peace, to stopping the killing, and we think that serves Ukraine, Mr. Secretary. | ||
| Did you just leave Ukraine? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Did not leave Ukraine. | |
| Have you visited Ukraine? | ||
| No, ma'am. | ||
| My first trip there, sir, was 1973. | ||
|
unidentified
|
I yield back. | |
| Mr. Carter, you're recognized for five minutes. | ||
| Thank you for your service to our country, Robert. | ||
| We're very proud of you. | ||
| I'm fully supportive of the Army's outgoing modernization efforts and the recent Army Transformation Initiative that combined the Army's Future Command with TRADOC to become the Transformational and Training Command. | ||
| How are you both going to create a partnership between the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology, and this new command to ensure the acquisition authorities are modernized and synchronized to achieve the maximum lethality and deterrence? | ||
| I'll take that. | ||
| Maybe I'll hand it to you, Mr. Chairman, as well. | ||
| We are very encouraged and supportive of the Army's transformation initiative. | ||
| General George has been critical to that, as has the Secretary of the Army, Dan Driscoll. | ||
| And together, it's been a heck of a partnership in a willingness to get at the core issues facing today's Army and ensuring it is reformed and modernized to meet the threats of the future. | ||
| One of those aspects is merging those commands. | ||
| And I can tell you, whether it's the warrior ethos or lethality, that is central to why we make decisions, ensuring that we're not making decisions on behalf of bureaucrats or process, but to ensure we're getting the most lethal aspects of what we do front and forward as quickly as possible. | ||
| And that involves things like Futures Command and TRADOC. | ||
| And when you merge those things, you have to make sure you're getting rid of things that are redundant and pushing forward things that matter the most. | ||
| But I'll defer to the Chairman. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, I've shared that commitment completely, and I share this transformation. | |
| What do you see as the fundamental capabilities of this command must develop to ensure that we have the lethality and deterrence necessary to succeed in Indo-PACOM? | ||
| We've got, that's where the future is. | ||
| Sir, I'll first echo the Secretary's respect and appreciation for Secretary Driscoll and General George. | ||
| They are a team, and that's always great to see from a warfighter's perspective when you have such a nested combat pair, if you will, that are driving at the same set of objectives. | ||
| I think there's clarity, Congressman, in the minds of both the Secretary and the Chief on the need for things like long-range fires in the Pacific. | ||
| And in order to pay for those, they're making those difficult decisions down the Army transformation initiative in order to pay for them. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, when we started talking about the Futures Command, one of the things that I was hoping we would do is we would not get a project stacked up on somebody's desk in a stack that high. | |
| And when you got down to checking on that, oh, that goes to you, and it goes on top of another, on the bottom of another stack that high. | ||
| And so we get delayed and delayed and delayed and delayed in certain areas of bureaucracy. | ||
| I think that is dangerous for our country as we look forward in Indo-PACOM. | ||
| And that's why I asked the question. | ||
| Another issue that's very important, the department has historically relied on outdated production techniques of energetic manufacturing, which may have remained unchanged since the Second World War. | ||
| How is the Department ensuring that investment in next generation energetics manufacturing, such as AI, machine learning capabilities, and enabling, and insurance of quality assurance, robotic-driven load, assembly, and PAC, and automated formation processes, | ||
| a prioritize and transition out research and development that is capable of these pathways? | ||
| In other words, a modern way to load and turn out ammunition in the simplest terms. | ||
| We're robustly funding things like DIU, like SCO, like the Office of Strategic Capital, to ensure that commercially available options, other companies are able to compete that traditionally are not involved in procurement at the Defense Department, so that the value of death is eliminated and you're able to bring in actual competition and dynamic solutions. | ||
| In otherwise, ammunition is a great example. | ||
| It's very antiquated in many cases. | ||
| We're still making rounds the way we made them after World War II. | ||
| You have to project out what you want to make, send that signal to industry, and then allow innovators to enter that space so they can bring new technology and rapidly field those new technologies. | ||
| Otherwise, you're stuck doing it the same way you've always done it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Sure, I was going to add something, but I'll hold off if you're going to roll. | |
| You can get a written response to the gentleman from Texas on that. | ||
| That's a concern to all of ours is to modernize our manufacturing capability before we can get back manufacturing to the United States. | ||
| Mr. Coyar, you're recognized. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Chairman. | ||
| Mr. Secretary, and all three of you all welcome and thank you for your service. | ||
| I represent an area from San Antonio all the way to Laredo, the border. | ||
| In San Antonio, we got Joint Base San Antonio, the largest joint base in the Department of Defense that contributes over $151 billion to the Texas economy. | ||
| We support 266 mission partners. | ||
| San Antonio also has the second largest cyber footprint in the nation, hosting the 16 Air Force cyber. | ||
| And then, of course, the military facilities that are the best in the country also. | ||
| Along with that, going down to Laredo, the largest port in the country, ninth largest in the world after eight Chinese ports, number nine in the world is Laredo. | ||
| And my question, Mr. Secretary, has to do with one of your plans and ask you to welcome you to San Antonio, let the San Antonio folks come in. | ||
| It has to do with Army, U.S. Army North and U.S. Army South. | ||
| I'm not going to go with their missions or critical missions. | ||
| But what concerns us in San Antonio, both the Democrats and Republican members of Congress and senators, we're concerned that instead of a Western Hemisphere Command, which I think is a good idea, that you move it away from a place like San Antonio where we have the infrastructure, the personnel, the community partnerships to work with you on this. | ||
| And I say this because I think your testimony has about 11,900 troops that are down there working with the homeland, which I support. | ||
| And keeping in mind what's happening with the cartels in Mexico and other places, I would ask you to, you know, when you look at this Western Hemisphere Command, that you don't move it 1,500 miles away from the border, especially in a place like San Antonio. | ||
| I think our Texas, I think we've got a few Texans here that can talk about the rest of the state of Texas and some wannabe Texans also that can talk about what the facilities we have. | ||
| But I would ask you to, as you consider this, to keep the command at Western Hemisphere Command in San Antonio. | ||
| Well, sir, count me amongst some of the wannabe Texans. | ||
| Tennessee is close enough. | ||
|
unidentified
|
We got no state income tax. | |
| It keeps that. | ||
| That's true. | ||
| I appreciate that concern. | ||
| It is something that has come up multiple times in conversations with Secretary Driscoll and General George in reviewing their Army modernization plan and consolidation with the recognition that some of those changes when we go through a posture review and as we're looking at commands are going to include some tough choices. | ||
| Some of that includes ranks and positioning, but you still are going to have, at some level, a south and north bifurcation. | ||
| The question is where that is headquartered. | ||
| And we are in an ongoing review on that of exactly where that will shake out. | ||
| But I would encourage continued deliberation with Secretary Driscoll. | ||
| They have been thoughtful about it and will continue to be. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And I understand that there's decisions that have to be made, efficiencies and all that, but just ask you, as you look at that, if we're doing so much investment on the border, we already got the infrastructure down there in San Antonio and all the support from the other military bases across the state of Texas and the partnership. | |
| I would ask you and the Secretary to please, before you make a decision, go drink the water, go feel what we have in San Antonio and the surrounding areas and Texas to consider that instead of just making a decision by the paper on that. | ||
| And certainly ask you to consider also the second largest footprint that we have at Cyber there in San Antonio and working with the top cyber university, UTSA, there. | ||
| And of course the military facilities that we have, which are in the best. | ||
| And certainly during the Afghanistan and Iraq war, that area was looked. | ||
| So I just ask that before any decisions were made, consider making a trip to San Antonio and have your folks understand that. | ||
| I know some of y'all have been in Texas before and would ask you to look at that. | ||
| So with that, Mr. Secretary and all of y'all, thank you for your service. | ||
| Well, noted, sir, and thank you for your contributions to securing the border, which has been a huge priority for President Trump. | ||
| We're going to get 100 percent operational control, and it's because of support and folks like you. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you for your service. | |
| Thank you. | ||
| Thank you, gentlemen. | ||
| Chairman Womack. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Chairman. | ||
| And my thanks to our witnesses here today. | ||
| Secretary Hex said, General Kane, thank you from the bottom of my heart and on behalf of this committee for your service to our nation. | ||
| Obviously, we face a number of challenges and pacing threats across the globe in all domains, and we have to ensure that the joint force is ready to fight and win our nation's wars. | ||
| So let me begin with General Kane. | ||
| What risks do the recent force structure changes or proposals in the Army and Marine Corps present to the joint force, given your global force integration responsibility? | ||
| Can you speak to that for a minute? | ||
| Yes, sir. | ||
| And I'll be mindful of the environment that we're in and speak broadly. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And thank you for the question. | |
| You know, we are having to make some difficult choices to pivot some of the combat capability that we have now to the combat capability that we need in the future. | ||
| Both services alongside the Department of the Navy and the Department of the Army are making those changes in order to provide us with the combat capability and capacity that we need at scale to create the dilemmas that we have to deliver for the joint force and our adversaries. | ||
| So at this point, you know, we're doing the right pivots, Congressman, to make sure that we have the right depth that we need. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Secretary Hegseth, both of you understand the unique value proposition that the National Guard provides the Joint Force, having served and, gosh, for a long time, it was just me and Hal Rogers up here as the Guard guys. | |
| So it's good to have some company. | ||
| As we're looking to be efficient with Federal dollars, I always kind of believe that the Guard and the Reserve Component structure in general brought what I called value to the force. | ||
| That I realize it is probably not at the same level of proficiency that the active duty counterparts might have, but they bring value to the force. | ||
| And when we need to surge responsibly and quickly, then the Guard and Reserve are certainly at the ready to do that. | ||
| My question is pretty simple. | ||
| Can you both commit to ensuring that the National Guard component is resourced and equipped properly to meet not only today's operational demands, but those in the future? | ||
| And I ask this question, having had experience back in the day when the National Guard was more or less a reserve force, and it was only after 9-11 that we began to use the National Guard in a truly operational form. | ||
| And I thought it did a lot of great things for the Guard. | ||
| I thought it brought value to the force. | ||
| And I worry sometimes that we may pivot back to the time when the National Guard is relegated to more of a reserve structure rather than able to surge with our forces in a moment's need and be able to deliver combat capability and combat service support capability when needed. | ||
| Can you speak to that, Secretary? | ||
| Sir, I think it's an excellent point. | ||
| It does the National Guard and Reserves bring great value, not to mention the civilian skills, the additive civilian skills that they bring. | ||
| Completely recognize the shift that happened after 9-11. | ||
| I was a part of that, as were many people in the Guard of our generation. | ||
| I think we are entering an even another phase, especially under President Trump with his focus on the homeland, where the National Guard and Reserves become a critical component of how we secure that homeland and apply those civilian sets across the spectrum. | ||
| So when you are looking at, say, the Army, for example, what we need in the active Army vis-a-vis the National Guard will not be a reflection of what we need or don't need. | ||
| It will be a right-sizing of where that particular application would be best used. | ||
| And the National Guard is a huge component of how we see the future, sir. | ||
|
unidentified
|
General Kane. | |
| Sir, I'll, you know, the policymakers tell us what size our force should be. | ||
| What I will commit to you, and by the way, thank you both for your service in the Guard as a fellow Guardsman. | ||
|
unidentified
|
You are a legendary in those hallways. | |
| What I will commit to you is that I will make sure that the voice of the Guard is heard at the policy level, pursuant to my job as the Chairman. | ||
| I yield, Mr. Chairman. | ||
| I thank the gentleman. | ||
| Mr. Case. | ||
| Thank you, Chair. | ||
| Mr. Secretary, at the Shangri-La dialogue in your speech of May 31st, you stated, and I quote, here in the Indo-Pacific, our futures are bound together. | ||
| The prosperity and security of the Indo-Pacific are linked to those of your people. | ||
| You went on to talk about the benefits from the, quote, peace and stability that comes with a lasting and strong American presence here in the Indo-Pacific, end quote. | ||
| Do you believe that the only way to achieve our contributions to peace and security and stability in the Indo-Pacific is through military strength alone? | ||
| Sir, certainly not through military strength alone, although military strength is the business that we are in. | ||
| So we are building partnerships across mill-to-mill, whether it is the Philippines, Japan, Australia, more actively than any other part of the world, because the application of American strength is not America alone. | ||
| It is by with and through partners who share mutual objectives. | ||
| And so we are very invested in military to military work. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Do you, as the Secretary of Defense, believe that we need to take a broader approach in the projection of national power, national influence than simply our military? | |
| Is that correct? | ||
| Well, sir, that's not my job. | ||
| My job is the military application. | ||
| So others will determine the broader spectrum of that, but it's always useful to have other applications of power as well. | ||
|
unidentified
|
But how others actually do that does impact your job in running our military, right? | |
| I mean, your military operations, your military presence, your mill-to-mill relationships that I agree are important are all going to be impacted by our non-military projection of power, influence, and assistance throughout the Indo-Pacific. | ||
| Is that correct? | ||
| I would just say that from my two recent visits to that region, meeting with many of those ministers of defense multiple times, their focus is what capabilities can we share together, interoperability and capabilities that establish deterrence, because the most important message America can still send and they can still send is hard power capabilities. | ||
| What can we project? | ||
| Where can we project it? | ||
| As the chairman said, what dilemmas can we create? | ||
| That's the business that we're in. | ||
| And so we work with those partners that share common goals. | ||
| And our militaries are working better together than they ever have. | ||
|
unidentified
|
And I appreciate your focus on the military side. | |
| That's obviously directly your job. | ||
| But I'm asking you to think and comment more broadly on our big picture approach to the world. | ||
| This administration, for example, has proposed to reduce the State Department by $8.3 billion, the Economic Support Fund, the Development Assistance and Democracy Fund, and the assistance for Eurasia. | ||
| This administration has illegally sought to destroy U.S. Agency for International Development and in its budget reduce it significantly down to close to zero. | ||
| This administration has proposed to reduce the international narcotics control and law enforcement effort by $1.2 billion. | ||
| This administration has proposed to eliminate the Millennium Challenge Corporation, or not eliminate it, but reduce it by $1 billion, a significant reduction. | ||
| One of our principal agencies that assists us with meeting the needs of the Indo-Pacific in the infrastructure area in what I think you would agree are key strategic countries such as Indonesia, such as Kiribati, such as the Philippines, such as the Solomon Islands. | ||
| This administration has proposed to reduce international organization contributions by 83 percent. | ||
| This administration is not following through on commitments that we made to the freely associated states, all of which are strategically critical to this country to expand veteran services in those three countries, Palau, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands. | ||
| This administration appears to be slowwalking the resurgence and expansion of the Peace Corps throughout the Indo-Pacific. | ||
| Do you think that that will affect your job in the military space with your relationships with those countries? | ||
| No, sir, I would add to that list the elimination of most U.S. AID programs, which I don't hear anything about because a lot of them were wasteful and duplicatous, and I'm glad we got rid of them. | ||
| Well, I have had that information. | ||
| You mentioned international organizations, the 83 percent reduction. | ||
| Again, I hear nothing about that because most of those international organizations are not serving U.S. interests. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Mr. Secretary, they're not serving U.S. interests. | |
| So I don't hear from our allies problems about that. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, I don't think you're talking about the same thing. | |
| If you talk to any one of those countries, they'll tell you that they're deeply concerned with the reduction of non-defense dollars, and it will, in fact, influence our presence and our contribution to your stated goal of peace and stability. | ||
| I think they respect that we're reducing waste on programs that aren't actually affecting change on the ground. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Mr. Diaz-Ballard. | |
| Thank you, and to three of you, thank you. | ||
| Thanks for being here, and thanks for your service. | ||
| Mr. Secretary, I have two questions. | ||
| First one is, and you mentioned recruitment at the beginning. | ||
| During the last four years, we got used to just hearing how the recruitment was not doing well and it was just the new reality. | ||
| And then all of a sudden, that reality has changed. | ||
| If you can comment on why that reality is changed, I think a lot of us know, but if you could talk to us a little bit about this new reality, which you don't hear much about in the press, about how that has changed dramatically. | ||
| Question number one. | ||
| Question number two is, a number of years ago, Southcom was moved from Panama to South Florida. | ||
| There's a lot of reasons for that move. | ||
| It was to get it because it was in close proximity with others like Jayada South, Special Operations Command South and Homestead, Joint Task Force, Guantanamo, the Joint Task Force Bravo and Honduras, the U.S. Coast Guard 7th District, which is the busiest district in the entire country, but also because in South Florida you have this multicultural, multilingual community. | ||
| And as you know, Southcom deals with multiple countries, 40 different languages. | ||
| And so it was not just a cost savings potentially, but it also made a lot of sense. | ||
| I believe that continues to be the case. | ||
| Nothing has changed. | ||
| If anything, what's changed is that the Western Hemisphere has gotten a lot more dangerous. | ||
| And obviously we have Iranian influence, Russian influence, Chinese influence. | ||
| I'm very grateful, Mr. Secretary. | ||
| I don't know how much you had to do with that, of the President's change in attitude on no longer appeasing enemies of the United States in the Southern Hemisphere, whether it's Venezuela or Cuba. | ||
| But again, there goes the importance of having Southcom where it is. | ||
| And I just would like your thoughts, if you've had an opportunity to look at that, because it was moved from Panama. | ||
| It just wasn't in South Florida for the heck of it. | ||
| It was a decision made. | ||
| It was the right decision. | ||
| It's proven to be the right decision. | ||
| So two questions, if you can answer them, I'd love to hear it. | ||
| Well, sir, thank you for the question about recruiting. | ||
| What changed is the commander-in-chief that America's young people believe in. | ||
| President Trump was elected in November, inaugurated in January, and at first I called it the Trump bump. | ||
| But then it became clear that's not enough. | ||
| This is a tsunami of support amongst young Americans who want to serve under a president who they know has their back, who will fund them properly, who will not use them unnecessarily, and will make sure they are part of deterrence for the country with a focus, first and foremost, on the homeland, then deterring strengths and making sure our allies step up and carry more of the burden. | ||
| So you've got a historic surge in the Army, Marine Corps, Navy, Air Force, you name it. | ||
| Americans are responding because the president says a new spirit, and he's right. | ||
| And you can feel it in the ranks. | ||
| You go out to formations, you talk to men and women on the border, they believe in what they're doing in securing that southern border. | ||
| You talk to them across the world, they're enthused about this new administration and its leadership. | ||
| So it's President Trump, sir. | ||
| And then as far as Southcom, it is President Trump's focus on our hemisphere has in many ways reinvigorated the mission of Southcom and the recognition of securing American interests, but also pushing back Chinese malign influence. | ||
| Panama is a great example of that, but across Central and South America. | ||
| So Southcom is right where it is. | ||
| We're grateful for the great work that they do. | ||
| I've had an opportunity to spend a lot of time with them and their commander, and we work by with and through a lot of allies. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Mr. Secretary, I'm a little confused. | |
| Are you telling me that the folks that are now voting with their commitment to the country are not upset that they're not able to use different pronouns? | ||
| Is that not a priority for the folks that are now signing up for our military? | ||
| Well, sir, if they wanted to get a woke indoctrination, they could just go to college. | ||
| Instead, they're joining the military, where we're focused on the basics. | ||
| We know men are men, women are women, standards will be high, and we're getting rid of the distractions, the ideologies, the politicization that was in our ranks so that soldiers, men and women can do their jobs on behalf of the nation. | ||
| I think that's all that American people, all the people who want to serve want, is that clarity and that support. | ||
| And President Trump is giving it. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, Mr. Secretary, I would also add that I think having you there has made it very clear what the attitude is. | |
| And I will tell you to me, it's really, really refreshing, and I thank you all. | ||
| I appreciate you back. | ||
| Thank you, sir. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yields back. | |
| Ms. Lee. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Chairman. | ||
| Thank you for being here. | ||
| Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to submit to the record an article from the New York Times entitled, China's Chokehold on this obscure mineral threatens the West Military. | ||
| Without objection. | ||
| Mr. Secretary, this article that I just referenced outlines how the Department of Defense paid an Australian firm 10 times more than it paid MP Materials, an American firm, to ensure the full ecosystem of rare earth production. | ||
| MP, the largest U.S. rare earth producer, has invested $1 billion of its own capital since 2020 and employs more than 800 Americans. | ||
| Yet it was undercut by an Australian firm that never even broke ground in the U.S. MP Materials is ready to install their samarium processing equipment and help the U.S. combat China's export controls. | ||
| And I want to note that China produces the entire world supply of this obscure rare earth metal that is used almost entirely in military applications because of its heat resistant, its use in heat resistance magnets. | ||
| So my question is, in accordance with the administration's America First Agenda, do you agree that subsidies should first support U.S. companies already investing, hiring, and paying taxes in the United States? | ||
| And can I have your support in ensuring that the Department critical mineral policies will align with this goal? | ||
| Ma'am, it's an excellent question. | ||
| It's something we have been very focused on. | ||
| In fact, my Deputy Secretary, it is A number one, is ensuring that sourcing of critical minerals, whether they're heavy or light rare earths, are sourced reliably in America first, and if not, then amongst allies. | ||
| I won't reveal or talk about more than that in a setting like this, because we have reserves and we have capabilities, but at the same time, we have to aggressively work. | ||
| And MP Materials, Mountain Pass, is a great example of a place where we can partner with industry. | ||
| But what does China do? | ||
| You know this. | ||
| China undercuts the market intentionally to try to corner the market, and we have to account for that in the things that we support. | ||
|
unidentified
|
So the answer is yes. | |
| I can have your support. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| I also want to turn now to the collaborative combat aircraft. | ||
| I represent Las Vegas, Nevada, so we're very excited that the department will base the CCA unit at Creech Air Force Base, which is the center of excellence in uncrewed aircraft systems. | ||
| And I want to make sure that the Department has the resources they need to make this program a success. | ||
| Last year, the Air Force had to shift $383 million to the CCA program, plusing it up by 60%. | ||
| Can you assure me that your budget request will fully fund the CCA program this year? | ||
| Ma'am, it does fully fund the CCA, and we believe in the Collaborative Combat Aircraft, the loyal wingman concept, this idea that you project power more robustly through autonomous, semi-autonomous systems that amplify our lethal effects. | ||
| So, yes. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you. | |
| Great. | ||
| Can you give me an update on the first flight and the production decision for increment one? | ||
| And are we on track for the flight? | ||
| When will it be? | ||
| And finally, when do you anticipate the production decision this fiscal year? | ||
| What quantity of aircraft will we procure? | ||
| How many vendors will you award? | ||
| And what factors are you considering? | ||
| Bryn, feel free to chime in. | ||
| You're talking about the CCA still. | ||
| Correct. | ||
| My understanding is later this year on the flight. | ||
| I don't know the exact date, ma'am. | ||
| But Bryn, you might know. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Yes, ma'am. | |
| We can get back to you on the specific date. | ||
| It should be this fiscal year. | ||
| And for our budget request, it's $804 million for the Collaborative Combat Aircraft. | ||
| Great. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| How much time do I have left? | ||
| I'll just also, can you then outline what is planned for increment two? | ||
| What type of capabilities can we expect? | ||
| And what timeline and critical milestones? | ||
| We'll get back to you on that one. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| Thank you. | ||
| With that, I yield. | ||
| Thank you, gentlelady. | ||
| And I'd just like to point out that Mountain Pass is in San Bernardino County, California. | ||
| So one of the only critical mineral mines only left in the United States. | ||
| Hopefully that will change soon. | ||
| Mr. Joyce. | ||
| Nope, nope. | ||
| Mr. Elzey. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Chairman. | ||
| Sergeant Major Troy Black. | ||
| Thank you for all your years of service. | ||
| You've been serving this country since Ronald Reagan was president in 1988. | ||
| You leave behind a distinguished career in uniform, wearing that uniform, service to your country. | ||
| You have served as the senior enlisted advisor to the Commandant of the Marine Corps and now to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs. | ||
| And I think what will be most missed, if you didn't know this about him, in 2010, he received the Bronze Star with a Combat V for running across several hundred yards of mine-in-placed fields to pick up a fallen Marine. | ||
| You're a Marines Marine. | ||
| You will be missed. | ||
| You are the pride of Louisville, Kentucky. | ||
| And I'd like to say on behalf of this committee and our nation, we're grateful, and fair winds and following seas. | ||
| Secretary Hegseth and General Cain and Ms. McDonald, glad you're here. | ||
| I'm personally grateful for your service to our country and for sharing your valuable time with us today. | ||
| Raising you bring a non-traditional perspective to your tenure as chairman, having been a guardsman and an entrepreneur. | ||
| Thank you for saying yes once again when called to serve and also distinguished flying cross and two bronze stars. | ||
| You didn't get that by sitting behind a desk. | ||
| You are a fighter pilots, fighter pilot. | ||
| You helped the plan to bring down Scuds in 2003. | ||
| So thank you for your service. | ||
| And Mr. Secretary, I want to salute you for your leadership and action-oriented approach at the Pentagon. | ||
| You've created a sense of urgency that General Kane refers to in his testimony. | ||
| And back to the issue of what we're not talking about today, and it's recruitment. | ||
| Because in this family business, all volunteer force of ours, parents and their children who want to serve our country are now no longer afraid to sign up for fear of them being misused or not having their merit being rewarded appropriately. | ||
| So thank you. | ||
| You've also highlighted our service academies in that effort. | ||
| Mr. Mwomack and I both serve on the boards of visitors at West Point and the Naval Academy, so thank you. | ||
| I also appreciate your guidance on using commercial solutions and acquisition and on reducing the inflation that we have seen in the numbers of flag and general officers. | ||
| And I think we can make the Pentagon a triangle pretty quick. | ||
| There are more Navy admirals in the various systems commands than there are in the fleet. | ||
| That's too many flags in D.C. and not enough at the waterfront or on the flight line. | ||
| But speaking of acquisition, I want to turn to the plans of a sixth-generation fighter. | ||
| General Kane, in his prepared statement, states that the F-47 will continue to ensure U.S. air dominance for decades. | ||
| I'm a fervent supporter of not only F-47, but whatever the FAXX is going to turn out to be. | ||
| And I want to make that clear to everyone listening. | ||
| Our Navy, our joint force, and our future combatant commanders need the Navy's sixth-generation fighter, the FAXX. | ||
| Relying only on the Air Force's sixth-generation fighter does not solve our air superiority challenge because whether they're coming from Guam or Diego Garcia, the dimpees are already set and the missiles are already guided. | ||
| It's a non-moving target. | ||
| An aircraft carrier moves its dimpy every 30 seconds. | ||
| So we can't do either of those with only the Air Force's planned bias. | ||
| So we either want to win or we don't, and I know we want to win. | ||
| We have to do it with the FAXX. | ||
| And a three-year delay is a de facto cancellation and a win for China, and they are watching. | ||
| And don't take my word for it, they're conducting unrestricted warfare against us right now. | ||
| And if you read the 36 guidelines from the 6th century, and they talk about how do you defeat an enemy or soon-su, you defeat them at home with fentanyl by taking out our military members before they can even join, 70,000 a year. | ||
| They are being successful in how they're doing unrestricted warfare, and that's exactly what they're conducting. | ||
| They're also showing us their sixth-generation aircraft right now, and there's at least three that we know they're working on. | ||
| We can't give the field to them and say fifth generation is okay for the Navy, but it's not for the Air Force. | ||
| We must have both. | ||
| So several well-informed, well-respected leaders shared with us the importance of having both the Air Force and the Navy sixth-generation fighters. | ||
| Admiral Poparo, General Alvin, and Admiral Kilby acting CNO. | ||
| I'm not going to put you all on the spot, but I just want to make it clear. | ||
| If you'd like to address it, you may. | ||
| I'm just putting it that it's that important to me. | ||
| So what troubles me about the Pentagon needing to be a triangle now is that one of my favorite movies is office space. | ||
| Remember Milton? | ||
| Milton down there with the swing line. | ||
| We're not really sure what he did, but he sure made a lot of trouble for everybody. | ||
| I think we have a lot of Miltons in the systems commands and down there in the Pentagon, maybe at Cape, who are telling you that we can't do something when we absolutely can. | ||
| They need to go. | ||
| So let's get rid of the Milton. | ||
| Let's invest in this generational investment. | ||
| I'd like to thank Chairman Calvert for his investment in the FAXX and the bill and present to this subcommittee later today. | ||
| So thank you all. | ||
| Appreciate it. | ||
| Okay, go Navy. | ||
| Mr. Morelli, you're recognized. | ||
| Thank you, General. | ||
| Chairman. | ||
| I'm grateful for your service and grateful, Mr. Chairman, for the hearing today. | ||
| I don't want to pile on, Mr. Secretary, and I'm brand new to this subcommittee, but I will say that in the same way we wouldn't go into battle without knowing the number of troops, our weaponry, the number of armaments, equipment, supplies. | ||
| It's really almost impossible for this committee to do its job without details from the President, from the Department on a budget request. | ||
| So I wonder whether or not we could get a commitment from all of you to come back before the committee when the full President's budget request has been delivered so you can answer questions in detail about it. | ||
| Certainly we'll make sure you get those details, Congressman. | ||
| Well, getting the details is important, but also being able to answer questions about those details and what they mean, I think would be helpful. | ||
| So obviously, you know, this is the Chairman's decision, but I would ask you to consider coming back before the committee when the President's budget request is submitted to us so we could get your sense of the various items in it. | ||
| I want to go back to a topic I think Ms. Kaptor raised, which is Ukraine. | ||
| And I really appreciate your comment that when you referred to partners on our side like Ukraine, so I'm glad we still consider them partners on our side. | ||
| Last week, the Ukraine Defense Contact Group met in Brussels. | ||
| I know we did not attend. | ||
| You did not attend. | ||
| And I don't believe you appeared even remotely, but that was a meeting in which allies coordinated billions in aid to help Ukraine. | ||
| We are talking about funding right now without a budget, without a plan to sustain U.S. support in what I consider the most serious conflict in Europe in a generation. | ||
| So can you at least give us a sense, Mr. Secretary, the presidential drawdown aid authorized through January 20th, do you know how much has actually been delivered? | ||
| Which VEA? | ||
| Just the presidential authority that was given through January 20th when the new administration took over. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Okay. | |
| And do you have a sense of how much has actually been delivered? | ||
| I don't know the exact amount that it's been delivered, but we're actively monitoring it as well as the lifespan of certain munitions, what munitions are made critical for us, critical for them, critical for allies like Israel. | ||
| We're paying very close attention to that. | ||
| And you can give us a detailed thank you. | ||
| Do you know whether the Department or the President is prepared to ask for funding for the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative and at what level? | ||
| It is a reduction in this budget. | ||
| As you know, this Administration takes a very different view of that conflict. | ||
| We believe a negotiated peaceful settlement is in the best interest of both parties and our nation's interests, especially with all the competing interests around the globe. | ||
| I don't think the word victory has been well defined or the path to it. | ||
| And as a result, a path to peace that stops the killing and the carnage is something that President Trump is very invested in. | ||
| Well, look, I would certainly think I would define victory as making sure incursions, illegal incursions by the Russian Federation into Ukraine, which is a sovereign nation, would be a victory. | ||
| But I'll leave that aside. | ||
| I want to just touch briefly on the limited time I have. | ||
| The President has announced $175 billion Golden Dome that has been talked about. | ||
| I know that what has been talked about, we understand that reconciliation includes a $25 billion down payment. | ||
| We haven't really seen much clarity on the specifics. | ||
| Can you tell me what the $25 billion will be used for? | ||
| Well, sir, there are many specifics that are not fitting for this setting. | ||
| We are happy to get you at the appropriate level the specifics you request. | ||
| But what we have done is we have built out the entire understanding of what the architecture would look like, ensuring it includes existing capabilities that can be fielded rapidly. | ||
| As President Trump has made the case, we need this now, not conceptually in the future. | ||
| You know, we had SDI under Ronald Reagan, which was a conceptual, which was a concept. | ||
| We've fast forward to the ability to deliver these things, and the American people deserve that kind of protection. | ||
| So, multiple layers for multiple different types of threats, coordinated with sensors, both on the ground and in space at other layers. | ||
| And we've got one of our best Space Force generals fully focused on that project, and General Gutline, who has a background in understanding those types of architectures. | ||
| So, we've pulled the program up to the Office of Secretary of Defense to make sure it's monitored on a monthly basis. | ||
| Can you tell us what the vibrations request will be for Golden Dome in the 26th fiscal year? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Well, the gentleman, go ahead. | |
| Excuse me, Mr. McDonald, you can get back to us on that for the record, and we appreciate that. | ||
| Mr. Fleischman, you're recognized. | ||
| Thank you, Mr. Chairman. | ||
| I want to welcome Secretary Hegseth, General Kane, and Mrs. McDonald. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| This has been an outstanding hearing. | ||
| Let me just say this: the world is a dangerous place. | ||
| The nation is a dangerous place. | ||
| Heartfelt thank you to each and every one of you officers stepping up and for doing an exemplary job. | ||
| Thank you so much. | ||
| As most of you know, I represent the third district of Tennessee. | ||
| That's the Great Oak Ridge Reservation, birthplace of the Manhattan Project. | ||
| In addition to serving on this prestigious subcommittee, I'm the chairman of the Energy and Water Subcommittee, which has the NNSA deeply involved in the recapitalization and modernization of our nation's nuclear deterrent. | ||
| It will come as no surprise to have concerns about both our progress and posture. | ||
| Our progress is a concern as we are recapitalizing the entire nuclear deterrent all at once. | ||
| Meanwhile, Russia has recapitalized its triad minus some bombers, and China is rapidly expanding its numbers and fielding a triad. | ||
| Of course, there's also North Korea and the looming prospect of a nuclear Iran. | ||
| As we focus more on the Pacific, our post-Cold War posture is a concern due to the lack of in-theater non-strategic nuclear weapons. | ||
| This creates a deeply worrying capability gap in the most critical theater. | ||
| I'll ask my questions and ask for your answers then. | ||
| First, Secretary Hegset, given this troubling strategic threat picture, what is your outlook on the current pace and scope of nuclear recapitalization? | ||
| And then, General Kane, what are your ideas to fill this non-strategic nuclear capability gap in the Pacific? | ||
| Are there any ways Congress can better support the Department's efforts to meet these increasingly tight deadlines? | ||
| And I'll listen to your responses. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| Sir, thank you. | ||
| First, if I would just take liberty, both the chairman and I have taken up almost all the oxygen from Bryn McDonnell here. | ||
| I would just take issue with the characterization that we have not delivered a budget and we don't have details and we're not delivering on it. | ||
| She and her team have done a fantastic job of working as rapidly and as detailed as possible to deliver what we feel very confidently is a robust, detailed delivery of the President's agenda for FY26. | ||
| So, Bryn, thank you for the work that you're doing and all the details and focus on that that have come through. | ||
| And that the nuclear triad is certainly a part of it. | ||
| NC3, every single aspect of that. | ||
| Sentinel with the Nun-McCurdy breach has to, we are taking a very hard look at that while fully funding it. | ||
| Columbia-class critical B-21, which for the most part has been a success story but needs to be continually monitored as any major platform does. | ||
| And then the Slick of Men as well in investing in that capability, considering the advantages we have on the submarine side. | ||
| So we are fully funding, in fact, even more so in most cases, that capitalization and modernization, which we have to considering what our adversaries are up to. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you, sir. | |
| Sir, I just echo the Secretary's comments about non-strategic nuclear weapons, Slickam and the others. | ||
| I think it really for me centers around four C's that we got to do across the enterprise: change the culture to get after it faster. | ||
|
unidentified
|
That's the first one. | |
| We got to create competition across the continuum and the defense and national industrial base. | ||
| We need to buy better contracts and get greater capacity. | ||
| So, no ads other than that, Congressman. | ||
| Thank you. | ||
| So, if I may, you all feel reasonably comfortable with the way that we're modernizing our triad. | ||
| Well, sir, I'm not comfortable with the way the Sentinel upgrade had been happening with a recognition that it is behind and can't be. | ||
| And so, we're getting at dynamic ways to address that. | ||
| Different alternatives. | ||
| Our Deputy Secretary and his team are very focused along with Bryn. | ||
| What do we fund? | ||
| Why do we fund it? | ||
| How do we look at new ways to do it? | ||
| Because the way we've approached it so far has gotten us nowhere fast. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Thank you. | |
| By the way, I welcome you all to visit Oak Ridge at any time. | ||
| Thank you, and I'll yield back. | ||
| Thank the gentleman. | ||
| Mr. Aguilar. | ||
| Thank you, Chairman General Calvert. | ||
| That's right. | ||
| Thanks to the witnesses for being here. | ||
| Okay, Private. | ||
| Go ahead. | ||
| The clock's still moving, Mr. Secretary. | ||
| I want to express my severe concern with the deployment of the National Guard in Los Angeles without consultation of the State of California. | ||
| There have been photographs that have shown these troops sleeping on the floor and have not been provided fuel, food, or water by DOD. | ||
| How long will this deployment last, and why were we unprepared to provide them basic necessities such as food and water? | ||
| The commanders and troops on the field are very well prepared, sir. | ||
| They responded incredibly rapidly to a deteriorating situation with equipment and capabilities. | ||
| We have made sure from the top down, as a Secretary of Defense who's been in a unit holding riot shields outside the White House during the chaos of the summer of 2020, I know what it's like to be immediately deployed into a situation like that. | ||
| There are moments where you make do as best you can temporarily, but we are ensuring they're housed, fed, water, capabilities in real time from my office because I care that much about the California Guard and the Marines and the men and women who are supporting our ICE agents on the ground. | ||
| It's true every day, and that's a disingenuous attack that misrepresents how much we care about our troops and what they're doing to defend ICE agents. | ||
| I'm not going to take the fact that we don't care about the troops. | ||
| Nobody cares more about the troops at the top than this Secretary and the Chairman and our will of deployment last. | ||
| We stated very publicly that it's 60 days because we want to ensure that those rioters, looters, and thugs on the other side assaulting our police officers know that we're not going anywhere. | ||
| We're here to maintain the peace on behalf of law enforcement officers in Los Angeles, which Gavin Newsom won't do. | ||
|
unidentified
|
What is the estimated cost of the deployment for the Guard and the Marines to L.A. and where's this funding coming from? | |
| Will it be coming from quality of life programs that affect our service members or our families if you want to wait till I finish? | ||
|
unidentified
|
Before I hand it to such as updates, housing and barracks. | |
| Before I hand it to Bryn, the insinuation that we're pulling money from housing and barracks in order to fund this is disingenuous and correct. | ||
| Bryn can give you the numbers, absolutely. | ||
|
unidentified
|
So the current estimated cost is $134 million, which is largely just TDY costs, travel, housing, food, et cetera. | |
| Where is it coming from? | ||
| That's the cost, but where is it coming from? | ||
| Their OM accounts. | ||
| With the most recent deployment of the Marines, Mr. Secretary, what's the justification for using the military for civilian law enforcement purposes in L.A.? | ||
| Why are you sending warfighters to cities to interact with civilians? | ||
| Every American citizen deserves to live in a community that's safe. | ||
| And ICE agents need to be able to do their job. | ||
| They're being attacked for doing their job, which is deporting illegal criminals. | ||
| That should happen in any city, Minneapolis or Los Angeles. | ||
| And if they're attacked, that's lawless. | ||
| And President Trump believes in law and order. | ||
| So he has every authority, and he has done mobilizing National Guard or active duty troops under U.S. Code to protect federal agents in their job, which is exactly what we're doing. | ||
| And we're proud to do it. | ||
| We're proud to do it. | ||
| 10 U.S.C. of the U.S. Code 12406 as a legal basis that the President used cites three examples and circumstances for the Guard. | ||
| Invasion by a foreign nation, a rebellion or dangerous rebellion against the authority of the government of the United States, or the President is unable with regular forces to execute the laws of the United States. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Which authority is triggered here to justify the use? | |
| I don't know. | ||
| You just read it yourself and people can listen themselves, but it sounds like all three to me. | ||
| If you've got millions of illegals and you don't know where they're coming from, they're waving flags from foreign countries and assaulting police officers and law enforcement officers. | ||
|
unidentified
|
That's the problem. | |
| Laws of the United States? | ||
| No, the governor of California is unable to execute the laws of the United States. | ||
| The governor of the California has failed to protect his people along with the mayor of Los Angeles. | ||
| And so President Trump has said he will protect our agents and our Guard and Marines are proud of that. | ||
| He also says, Mr. Secretary, that the orders for these purposes shall be issued through governors of the states. | ||
| You and I both know that President Trump has all the authorities necessary, and thankfully he's willing to do it on behalf of the citizens of Los Angeles, on behalf of our ICE agents, and behalf of our country. | ||
|
unidentified
|
Join C-SPAN for live coverage of the U.S. Army's 250th anniversary parade and celebration today from Washington, D.C., commemorating June 14, 1775, |