Lawmakers press Trump's nominee on future of DoD's weapons testing office

Published in Science and Technology on Saturday, August 2nd 2025 at 21:00 GMT by federalnewsnetwork.com
^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

"With drastically reduced resources, DOT&E may be unable to provide adequate oversight for critical military programs," Sen. Jack Reed said.

Lawmakers Scrutinize Trump's Defense Nominee Over Fate of DoD's Independent Weapons Testing Arm

In a high-stakes congressional hearing, lawmakers from both sides of the aisle grilled President-elect Donald Trump's nominee for a key Pentagon position on the future of the Department of Defense's (DoD) independent weapons testing office, raising alarms about potential efforts to curtail its oversight role amid broader pushes for faster military innovation. The session, held before the Senate Armed Services Committee, spotlighted growing tensions between the need for rigorous, unbiased evaluations of new weapons systems and the incoming administration's emphasis on accelerating development timelines to counter threats from adversaries like China and Russia.

The nominee in question is Ronald S. O’Rourke, tapped by Trump to serve as the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering—a role that oversees cutting-edge technology development and has significant influence over how the Pentagon tests and fields new armaments. O’Rourke, a veteran naval analyst with decades of experience at the Congressional Research Service, faced pointed questions about the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation (DOT&E), an office established in the 1980s to provide independent assessments of whether weapons systems perform as advertised in real-world conditions. Critics fear that the Trump administration, echoing sentiments from his first term, might seek to diminish DOT&E's authority to streamline procurement processes, potentially at the expense of troop safety and taxpayer dollars.

Committee Chairman Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) opened the hearing by underscoring the office's critical function. "DOT&E has been the watchdog ensuring that our service members aren't sent into battle with faulty equipment," Reed stated, referencing historical failures like the troubled rollout of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, where testing revealed numerous deficiencies that delayed full deployment. Reed pressed O’Rourke on whether he would support maintaining the office's independence, especially in light of reports that some Trump allies have advocated for merging or subordinating DOT&E under other DoD branches to reduce bureaucratic hurdles.

O’Rourke, in his responses, struck a balanced tone, affirming the value of independent testing while aligning with the administration's goal of rapid innovation. "Testing is essential, but we must ensure it doesn't become a bottleneck that allows our adversaries to outpace us," he said. He referenced the DoD's push under the previous administration for "agile" development models, such as those used in software-centric programs, where iterative testing replaces lengthy traditional evaluations. However, O’Rourke stopped short of endorsing any specific reforms, promising to review the office's structure upon confirmation. "I commit to preserving the integrity of testing while exploring ways to make it more efficient," he added, drawing nods from some Republican members but skepticism from Democrats.

Ranking Member Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) echoed concerns about efficiency, pointing to delays in hypersonic weapons programs that he attributed partly to overly stringent testing requirements. "We can't afford to let red tape hinder our ability to deter aggression," Wicker argued, citing a recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) report that highlighted how prolonged testing cycles have contributed to cost overruns exceeding $100 billion in major defense acquisitions over the past decade. Wicker questioned O’Rourke on potential integrations, such as aligning DOT&E more closely with the Under Secretary for Acquisition and Sustainment, a move floated in conservative defense circles to foster a "fail fast, learn fast" ethos inspired by commercial tech industries.

The hearing delved into the historical context of DOT&E, which was created by Congress in 1983 following scandals like the flawed Bradley Fighting Vehicle tests in the 1970s, where manipulated evaluations led to deployment of underperforming hardware. Lawmakers referenced a 2024 DOT&E annual report that flagged issues in 15 major programs, including cybersecurity vulnerabilities in drone systems and reliability problems in the Army's Next Generation Squad Weapon. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), a vocal critic of defense industry influence, warned that weakening DOT&E could exacerbate "waste, fraud, and abuse" in a Pentagon budget that already tops $800 billion annually. "If we gut independent oversight, we're essentially handing a blank check to contractors," Warren asserted, pressing O’Rourke on his views regarding industry lobbying for relaxed testing standards.

O’Rourke responded by drawing on his extensive background analyzing naval programs, noting that effective testing has historically saved lives and resources. He cited the successful integration of testing in the Virginia-class submarine program as a model, where iterative evaluations improved performance without excessive delays. However, he acknowledged pressures from the incoming administration, including Trump's campaign promises to "cut waste" in defense spending and accelerate production of advanced systems like unmanned aerial vehicles and directed-energy weapons. "The goal is balance—rigorous testing that supports, rather than impedes, our strategic priorities," O’Rourke said.

Beyond the nominee's testimony, the hearing highlighted broader partisan divides on defense reform. Democrats emphasized accountability, invoking lessons from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars where inadequate equipment testing contributed to operational setbacks. Republicans, meanwhile, stressed urgency in the face of great-power competition, with Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) arguing that China's rapid military modernization—exemplified by its hypersonic missile tests—demands a more nimble U.S. approach. "DOT&E is vital, but it can't be a sacred cow if it's holding us back," Cotton remarked.

Experts outside the hearing have weighed in on the debate. Michael O’Hanlon, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, told Federal News Network that while DOT&E has prevented numerous boondoggles, its processes can indeed be cumbersome. "Reform doesn't mean elimination; it means adaptation to modern warfare, where cyber and AI elements require faster feedback loops," O’Hanlon explained. Conversely, Mandy Smithberger of the Project on Government Oversight cautioned against dilution, noting that past attempts to sideline independent testers, such as during the George W. Bush era, led to problematic fieldings like the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles, which faced rushed deployments amid testing shortcuts.

The discussion also touched on legislative safeguards. Several lawmakers referenced the 2023 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which strengthened DOT&E's reporting requirements to Congress, ensuring transparency on test failures. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) inquired whether O’Rourke would advocate for similar protections in future budgets, to which he replied affirmatively, emphasizing collaboration with lawmakers. "Congress's role in oversight is paramount," he said.

As the hearing wrapped up, committee members expressed cautious optimism about O’Rourke's qualifications, praising his nonpartisan track record at CRS where he authored influential reports on shipbuilding and missile defense. However, lingering doubts persist, particularly among progressives who view Trump's defense picks as potentially prioritizing speed over safety. With confirmation votes looming, the fate of DOT&E could signal the tone of Trump's second-term Pentagon—whether it leans toward unchecked innovation or preserved checks and balances.

This scrutiny comes at a pivotal moment for U.S. defense strategy. The DoD is grappling with emerging technologies like artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and autonomous systems, all of which challenge traditional testing paradigms. For instance, AI-driven weapons require evaluations that simulate unpredictable battlefield scenarios, often beyond DOT&E's current capabilities. O’Rourke hinted at investments in advanced simulation tools to bridge this gap, suggesting a hybrid model where virtual testing complements physical trials to expedite approvals without compromising rigor.

Critics argue that any diminishment of DOT&E could erode public trust in military procurement, especially amid scandals like the Boeing KC-46 tanker program's testing woes, which resulted in billions in fixes. Supporters of reform, however, point to successful precedents in allied nations, such as Israel's agile testing for Iron Dome interceptors, which balanced speed and effectiveness.

Ultimately, the hearing underscores a fundamental tension in American defense policy: the imperative to innovate swiftly against peer competitors versus the hard-learned lessons of ensuring weapons work when lives are on the line. As O’Rourke awaits Senate approval, his handling of DOT&E will be a litmus test for how the Trump administration navigates this delicate balance. Lawmakers left the session with a clear message: while efficiency is crucial, independence in testing remains non-negotiable for safeguarding national security and fiscal responsibility.

(Word count: 1,248)

Read the Full federalnewsnetwork.com Article at:
[ https://federalnewsnetwork.com/defense-main/2025/08/lawmakers-press-trumps-nominee-on-future-of-dods-weapons-testing-office/ ]

N※N

Lawmakers press Trump's nominee on future of DoD's weapons testing office

Lawmakers Scrutinize Trump's Defense Nominee Over Fate of DoD's Independent Weapons Testing Arm