WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator John Boozman (R-AR), Chairman of the Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies (MilCon-VA) Appropriations Subcommittee, held a hearing examining the fiscal year 2026 budget request for military infrastructure and family housing. As a critical force enabler, these projects support everything from infrastructure tied to new weapons platforms to quality-of-life facilities like hospitals, schools and housing. Chairman Boozman emphasized the need to deliver timely, high-quality facilities on schedule and within budget, and expressed his hope that future budget requests reflect efficiencies that lower the cost of individual projects.

Chairman Boozman delivered the following opening statement, lightly edited for clarity and length:

Good morning, and the subcommittee will come to order.

First, I would like to welcome Ranking Member Ossoff and congratulate him on the birth of his second daughter, Lila.  I look forward to working with you on the subcommittee.

We meet today to discuss the president’s fiscal year 2026 budget request for military construction and family housing for the Department of Defense.

I would like to begin by recognizing today’s panel. Today we will hear from representatives of all the military services as well as the Office of the Secretary of Defense.

This year’s MILCON request is $18.9 billion, a figure we only recently received due to significant delays in delivery of the budget to Congress. We on the subcommittee look forward to receiving the justification books and related exhibits, which still have not been delivered but are expected later this month.

From the data currently available, we know this request is an increase of $1.4 billion over the fiscal year 2025 enacted levels. While I am encouraged to see another year of growth in the MILCON request, I remain concerned that we’re not necessarily buying more, we’re simply paying more.

Some of these budget numbers are staggering.

Not that long ago hitting the $100 million mark on a single project was significant—now it has become routine. Increments, once the exception, are increasingly the norm, accounting for nearly $6 billion in this year’s request. That’s more than 40 projects so costly they require incremental funding over multiple years. 

That may seem normal now, but this was not always the case.

Multi-billion-dollar recapitalization efforts, combined with the increasing complexity of facilities needed to support today’s weapons systems, are resulting in larger and more complex projects.

At the same time, inflation and other economic pressures continue to escalate costs. This trajectory is not sustainable and future budget requests cannot continue absorbing these rising costs.

To that end, I am encouraged by the conversations taking place within the Department that are examining the full range of factors—policies, procedures, regulations and laws—that affect MILCON and its associated costs. Some of these are established by Congress, others stem from DoD policy, and some may be self-imposed. 

As such, the effort required to drive meaningful changes will vary. But I’m hopeful that these discussions will lead to thoughtful analysis, honest dialogue, and ultimately, real improvements in the efficiency of the MILCON process. 

Some of this will require close collaboration between Congress and the Department, and I’m committed to being a partner in that effort.

There will always be factors beyond your control, which makes managing the areas you can control all the more critical. 

The recent injunction reinstating Project Labor Agreement requirements is a clear example of how external influences can introduce uncertainty and added costs into the MILCON process, costs that are especially difficult to anticipate given how long the current planning, programming and budgeting cycle takes.

I hope one outcome of the ongoing review directed by the Deputy Secretary of Defense is a faster timeline from project inception to final delivery.

As a critical force enabler, MILCON supports everything from infrastructure tied to new weapons platforms to quality-of-life facilities like hospitals, schools and housing. We owe it to the servicemember, and the taxpayer, to deliver timely, high-quality facilities on schedule and within budget, and I hope that future budget requests reflect efficiencies that lower the cost of individual projects. 

I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today and continuing the dialogue and work needed for a successful MILCON program.