Congressional leaders are demanding answers from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth after the independent office tasked with reviewing new military programs and weapons pulled all public reports from its website.
“One of the most important functions of (the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation) is to provide transparency about the safety and effectiveness of major weapon systems,” wrote Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Rep. Donald Norcross (D-NJ) in a letter this month.
Warren is a ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Personnel, and Norcross is a ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee’s Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee.
“A key element of this function is the release of publicly available annual reports that detail findings by DOT&E to make sure critical deficiencies are fixed so service members are not harmed or killed,” they added.
Despite legal obligations to publish the annual reports it sends to Congress online, the office now requires a Defense Department-issued common access card to access the collection, which includes material that has been available to the public for years.
A Defense Department official told Federal News Network that the decision to remove the materials was based on concerns that foreign adversaries could use artificial intelligence tools to develop detailed profiles of the U.S. military’s vulnerabilities.
But critics of the decision say the reasoning is part of an ongoing effort to reduce oversight and accountability as Defense Department officials set records for spending and budget requests.
Last May, Hegseth issued a memo directing the DOT&E to significantly reduce its workforce and budget in the name of cost-savings. In turn, the office’s staff was cut by some 74% and its budget by nearly 80%. The Defense Department subsequently proposed a $1.5 trillion budget for 2027.
In an interview with Military Times, Gabe Murphy, a policy analyst with Taxpayers for Common Sense, or TCS, called it “suspicious” that officials gutted the DOT&E office prior to proposing a massive spending increase.
Murphy pointed to the ambitious Golden Dome Missile Defense System as an example of a project that warrants more oversight.
“They know that missile defense in general — and I think in particular, the space-based interceptors they want for this program — are not going to perform well in real tests,” he added.
To those pitching and building the project, the trillion-dollar Golden Dome is described as a missile defense system capable of detecting, tracking and intercepting aerial threats before reaching American soil.
But to critics like Murphy, it’s “questionable strategically and questionable in terms of their affordability.”
In a TSC report, the organization argued against the project because of concerns of scale and price. The group argued that while Golden Dome is modeled after Israel’s “Iron Dome,” which is designed for short- and medium-range missiles, the U.S. model would have to adjust for scale and threat, which would significantly increase costs.
While Defense Department officials say the estimated cost for the Golden Dome will be about $175 billion within the next three years, others say it could be anywhere from $1.2 trillion to $4.4 trillion over the next two decades.
As for the project’s effectiveness, the TSC report said the technology is unproven and that the available evidence suggests it will not work as proposed. But without live-fire testing and analysis by independent offices like the DOT&E, it would be difficult to know for sure.
“Without these reports, Congress has a lot less information to work with in terms of figuring out, you know, the sort of appropriate acquisition approach to some of these programs,” he said, adding that eliminating funding for the DOT&E would end up costing more money than it saves.
Historically, Congress uses DOT&E reports to inform funding decisions, and making them publicly available gives voters and taxpayers insight into the lawmakers’ decisions, according to the Project on Government Oversight, or POGO, a non-profit government watchdog group.
Months after Hegseth proposed the $300 million cuts to DOT&E, POGO released a detailed analysis showing how DOT&E reports have been effective in the past.
For instance, Congress made DOT&E responsible for live-fire testing in 1986, after Army officials allegedly misled lawmakers about the performance of the Bradley Fighting Vehicle.
The Government Accountability Office seemed to validate critics’ concerns about defanging DOT&E as well. In a June report, the office warned that the Pentagon’s drive to field new weapons will outpace the DOT&E’s ability to catch problems before systems reach troops.
In their letter, Warren and Norcross requested that the Defense Department submit responses to their committees by Aug. 26.
Daniel Terrill is a contributor to Military Times. He’s been reporting on military issues, the gun industry, and the outdoors for nearly two decades. Although writing is his passion, he’s been a Marine, police officer, and, perhaps the most dangerous job of his career, a substitute teacher.
