Congress Wants Answers From Pentagon on Classified $60 Billion Defense Budget

Democratic lawmakers have given U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth a deadline to respond to a series of budgetary questions regarding an appropriated $60 billion that has no spending plan and remains classified to the public and to members of Congress.

The Department of Defense submitted a fully classified spending plan for $90 billion of the $150 billion budget appropriated for national security after Republicans’ reconciliation bill passed July 3, 2025, and was signed by President Donald Trump one day later. Money was said to go towards the so-called Golden Dome project, shipbuilding and weapons procurement, etc.

But Congress has yet to receive a spending plan for the remaining $60 billion that was appropriated, with some members questioning the budget’s intent and lack of oversight at the federal level.

The newest letter of correspondence addressed to Hegseth was composed by U.S. Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee.

“Senate Budget Dems are exercising legitimate congressional oversight authority and calling on Secretary Hegseth to explain how DOD is using the funds provided in the Republican Big, Ugly Betrayal Bill,” Merkley told Military.com. “His decision to classify the entire spend plan is unjustified and raises serious transparency concerns.

“Senate Budget Dems will continue to use every oversight tool available to get answers from DOD and ensure accountability to the American taxpayer.”

Merkley was joined in his concerns by fellow Senate Budget Committee Democrats Patty Murray (WA), Ron Wyden (OR), Bernie Sanders (VT), Sheldon Whitehouse (RI), Mark Warner (VA), Tim Kaine (VA), Chris Van Hollen (MD), Ben Ray Luján (NM) and Alex Padilla (CA).

DOD Giving 'No Explanation'

The letter, sent on Wednesday to Hegseth, says that “even at the height of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, defense appropriation spend plans were not fully classified.”

The letter mentions how the One Big Beautiful Bill, known as H.R. 1, passed Congress and included a requirement for Hegseth to submit a detailed spending plan within 45 days of enactment and to provide an annual expenditure report beginning one year after enactment.

The Department has offered no explanation for why the spend plan was classified, even though some items included in H.R. 1, such as barracks improvements or personnel benefit increases, are not sensitive. It strains credulity that all the items in the $90 billion classified spend plan are sensitive enough to warrant complete classification.

“In prior years, only intelligence or specific sensitive programs required classified spend plans, while other defense budget materials were provided in unclassified form or with classified appendices as appropriate. The current approach deviates sharply from long-standing practice and raises serious questions about DOD’s rationale," the letter adds.

Democratic lawmakers tied the classified spending plan to “broader transparency concerns,” specifically mentioning how the Pentagon’s more recent communication restrictions—including with the media, in the form of a revamped press room in Washington—“further limit oversight and undermines public accountability.”

Senators also inquired in their letter whether reconciliation funds may have been used for purposes not contemplated by law, such as paying troops during the long government shutdown late last year—or via the $1,776 “Warrior Dividend” that was announced in December as a one-time bonus payment to roughly 1.4 million active-duty and eligible reserve service members.

List of Questions, With a Deadline

The letter requests that Hegseth and the Pentagon respond to the letter and the following series of questions, listed verbatim, by Feb. 20:

1. What is DOD’s justification for classifying the spending plan?
2. Funding for specific classified programs was not included in the reconciliation bill. Are any classified programs receiving funding through reconciliation?
3. Will DOD commit to providing relevant committees of jurisdiction with access to the complete spending plan, including all classified and unclassified materials?
4. Will the reconciliation spending plan be incorporated into the FY2027 budget request? 
5. Why did DOD transmit a spend plan for $90 billion but not the remaining $60 billion? What factors contributed to the development and transmittal of only a partial spend plan?
6. When does the Department plan to submit a spend plan for the remaining $60 billion? Will any subsequent partial spend plan also be classified, and if so, why? 

A DOD spokesperson told Military.com on Wednesday that while the department does not comment on member discussions on Capitol Hill, they will as usual respond within the deadline set by the Democratic lawmakers.

Bigger Defense Budget?

The U.S. House Armed Services Committee at the time of the reconciliation praised the $150 billion in mandatory funding to strengthen national defense and implement Trump’s “visionary” Peace through Strength agenda, including military modernization, border security, and revitalizing the national industrial base.

However, both the House and Senate Armed Services Committees lent insight on how those funds should be spent. DOD was tasked by the committees to submit a detailed spending plan by Aug. 22, 2025, with Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS), chairman of the Senate committee, publicly pressing officials’ commitment to meet that deadline.

While DOD did not meet that deadline, per the letter, it provided both committees with the classified spending plan detailing approximately roughly $90 billion of the $150 billion.

Military.com reached out to Wicker’s office for comment.

More recently, Trump has publicly said he wants to again increase the defense budget roughly another $500 billion—which, if it became a reality, would spike the current Pentagon budget for Fiscal Year 2026 to roughly $1.5 trillion.

That increase has been supported by Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, who told Breaking Defense this week that he is already seeking $450 billion for defense in the next reconciliation bill.

If that came to fruition, it would represent a drastic hike from the $150 billion secured in the 2025 reconciliation bill.

“We have all these big ticket items that we have to do, and you can’t do that on a trillion-dollar budget. You just can’t,” Rogers said. “So that’s the sobering side of the story that I think we’re going to be able to offer to our colleagues when it comes to getting the votes to do this.”