The House Armed Services Committee’s (HASC) rejected an amendment to the fiscal 2027 defense authorization bill to cut funding for the new Trump-class battleship but did agree to a report on how the Navy will manage another nuclear-powered vessel.
During the full committee markup last week, ranking member Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.) offered an amendment to reduce the battleship advanced procurement funding by its full $1 billion amount. The amendment failed by a vote of 26-30.
Smith argued part of his objection is about thinking of getting the U.S. to meet national security needs “in a more affordable way. This is the exact opposite of that. This, I believe, is currently estimated to cost north of $20 billion. Whatever the number is, I’m going to give you one of the surest fire Kalshi bets you will ever have: take the over. Whatever they come up with, the number, it’s going to wind up higher.”
The Defense Department should instead focus on more small and attritable autonomous systems that can still meet firepower needs, Smith added.
HASC Chairman Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.) was the only lawmaker to speak in favor of the battleship during the amendment’s debate, repeating what top Navy officials have said in defense of the concept.
“The battleship is not a new concept. There has been a requirement for a large surface combatant for decades. The battleship was born out of the studies conducted on the DDG(X) during the Biden administration. We currently lack a ship with enough space or power to support the combat systems we need for future conflicts like hypersonics and high energy lasers,” Rogers said.
Cutting the battleship funding would prevent procurement of long-lead materials and stalling advancements in the ship design process, Rogers argued.
However, Rep. Joe Courtney (D-Conn.), ranking member of the HASC Seapower and Projection Forces subcommittee, countered that the administration announced the battleship last December without any of the designs, studies or analysis that usually precedes starting a new ship class.
While the Republican majority maintained the battleship’s funding authorization, one provision in the Seapower subcommittee’s package of en bloc amendments includes a provision requiring the Navy secretary to provide a report on the strategy to design and build a battleship BBG(X) without interfering with the existing nuclear-powered shipbuilding plans.
Authored by Courtney, the amendment states the committee is “concerned about the possibility of strain on U.S. nuclear shipyards and maritime industrial base posed by the aggressive schedule proposed for producing a nuclear-powered BBG(X) platform.”
The Navy’s 30-year shipbuilding plan released last month revealed the service ultimately decided the battleship would be nuclear-powered, using the reactor used in the Ford-class aircraft carriers.
Exchange Monitor affiliate Defense Daily first published a version of this story.