Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth returned to Capitol Hill on Tuesday to advocate before House and Senate appropriations subcommittees for congressional approval of the largest Pentagon budget of all time.
But as White House tries to sideline Congress with its ongoing war in Iran, lawmakers from both parties tried to use the hearings to reassert their power — over the Department of Defense, over the war in Iran, the growing price tag for the “excursion,” and looming concerns about a dwindling munitions stockpile.
“Reasonable people have disagreed about the boundaries of presidential war powers for a long time,” Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, told Hegseth during the Senate hearing. “But the War Powers Resolution is pretty clear here; it requires the president to terminate hostilities within 60 days, absent congressional authorization.”
Murkowski continued that it was important for Congress to “actually assert our own role and responsibility” on the war in Iran. “That 60 day clock expired, April 28,” she said.
The Trump administration has asserted that hostilities in Iran have “terminated,” arguing that the 60-day clock on Trump’s unauthorized war is no longer relevant. Plenty of lawmakers don’t buy that argument.
Other lawmakers pressed Hegseth on the cost of the war.
“I would hope we can get a supplemental bill here soon, obviously,” said Rep. Ken Calvert, a California Republican who chairs the House Appropriations Defense subcommittee where Hegseth also testified on Tuesday.
“We know of the munitions issue, and we know of the cost of this conflict, and we know the cost of other conflicts, and so we need to repay those on accounts that are going to be used, I suspect, in order to pay for this ongoing operation,” Calvert said.
The demand — which belies a simmering impatience on the Hill for funding a war lawmakers never authorized — was echoed by Calvert’s Democratic counterpart, Rep. Betty McCollum, D-Minn., who demanded that Hegseth send lawmakers a war supplemental by early June.
And when McCollum asked if Hegseth had a “Plan B” if Congress didn’t pass a war authorization, he said “we have a plan for all of that,” though he declined to provide specifics.
Hegseth also pushed back on concerns from lawmakers about a shrinking stockpile of munitions as a result of the Iran war. Hegseth called the munitions issue “foolishly and unhelpfully overstated.”
Democrats were also incredulous about the cost of the war. Two weeks ago, Hegseth testified that the Iran war had cost about $25 billion — a figure Democrats instantly doubted.
On Tuesday, acting Pentagon comptroller Jules Hurst said the war had now cost $29 billion, citing “updated repair and replacement of equipment cost” as well as “general operational costs to keep people in theater.”
But once again, Democrats were dubious.
For one, as Hurst pointed out during the House hearing, there is roughly $40 billion in ammunitions requests in a reconciliation bill that is already waiting for lawmakers. For another, Democrats fear the Trump administration is hiding the true cost of the war in a dramatically increased Pentagon budget for next year — from roughly $1 trillion this fiscal year to $1.5 trillion for next.
“We have so many questions, Mr. Secretary, about … this $1.5 trillion budget request, and at the core is going to be: what’s the cost of the war we’re in in Iran? How long will it go?” Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., said. “What damage has been done to our security and our strategic position? When will we get a supplemental request and of what scale? When will we be requested to authorize this war, and when will the American people get a clear answer about our strategic goals and how we will achieve them?”
Coons made it clear he supports going after the Iranian regime — but he expressed serious concerns about the administration’s process and end game.
Hegseth, for his part, was uncharacteristically muted as he parried lines of questions from lawmakers, including from longtime former Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell.
“I think what’s not in dispute is that NATO is the most important military alliance in world history,” the Kentucky Republican told Hegseth. “Nobody’s ever pulled something together like this and held it together to prevent the worst for a longer period of time.”
“Basically,” McConnell continued, “it seems to me that a lot of the European countries think that we’re reducing our influence there. They’re sort of on their own, and somehow American leadership is not essential in NATO going forward. I would argue that it is certainly essential for us to continue to be the leader.”
Trump has repeatedly threatened to pull out of NATO, and he has criticized Europe for not joining U.S. actions to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.
Of course, the strait has become the biggest global pain point of this war. Lawmakers pressed Hegseth — as well as Joint Chiefs Chairman General Dan Caine — on whether President Trump anticipated the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, and the resulting strain on global oil supplies.
Among the senators questioning whether Trump had anticipated a global price increase to oil was Appropriations Chairwoman Susan Collins, R-Maine, who previously voted with Democrats on a failed war powers resolution that would’ve hemmed in Trump’s unilateral powers on Iran.
“I ask this question,” Collins said, “because there’s historic precedent. Obviously, during the Iraq Iran war, tankers were fired upon in the strait.”
Caine said the Pentagon considers the “full range of things, all the time” before presenting military advice or options to civilian leaders.
Democratic Sen. Brian Schatz of Hawaii continued with a similar line of questions.
“There are some data points that seem to indicate that we did not see all of this coming, or that we didn’t account for it. We may have been briefed on it, but we didn’t account for it,” Schatz said, pointing to last minute munition movements and rushed evacuations of U.S. personnel.
“Can you just reassure us that this was all foreseen and part of the plan? Or can you tell us whether there were any surprises here?” he asked.
“I can reassure you that it was all accounted for. Every aspect of this was poured over by the Joint Staff, by civilian leadership, and represented in pursuit of a very clear goal,” Hegseth told Schatz. “It was all in service of ensuring Iran never has a nuclear weapon.”
While lawmakers see some opportunity to take back control of the war from the Trump administration, any effort of Congress to reassert its war powers will be limited by Republicans. And it was clear from both hearings on Tuesday that plenty of Republicans are plenty comfortable with the president’s handling of the war in Iran.
When MS NOW asked Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., if his patience with the war was wearing thin, he made it clear he trusted Trump.
“Do I wish talks would go faster? Yes,” Kennedy said. “But you’re not dealing with rational people” in Iran.
Lillie Boudreaux and Julia Jester contributed to this report.
The post Lawmakers look for new leverage points on Iran during Hegseth hearings appeared first on MS NOW.
