The U.S. Navy is grappling with significant delays in shipbuilding and a base budget that lawmakers say fails to meet the nation’s strategic defense needs—particularly in light of China’s growing naval capabilities.

uring a Tuesday hearing of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, Navy and Marine Corps leadership faced bipartisan scrutiny over lagging production schedules and what senators see as an inadequate funding request for fiscal year 2026.

Testifying before the committee were Navy Secretary John Phelan, Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Eric Smith, and Adm. James Kilby, the acting chief of naval operations.

Adm. Kilby emphasized the Navy’s primary strategic concern: “The Navy is laser-focused on China as our most consequential opponent,” he said, highlighting the service’s ambitious aim “to make 80% of our ships, submarines and aircraft combat surge-ready by 1 January 2027.”

Here's What They're Not Telling You About Your Retirement

Despite this goal, committee members expressed deep frustration over the Navy’s proposed base budget, which they believe falls short of enabling readiness or expediting critical shipbuilding programs. The reaction was not partisan; senators from both sides of the aisle appeared united in concern.

Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., recently summarized the discontent, saying he was “deeply disappointed as well as disturbed by the budget request.”

Echoing that sentiment during the hearing, Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said the request “would keep up on the prior administration’s completely inadequate trajectory in terms of shipbuilding.” She firmly added, “Reconciliation was always meant to be just a one-time funding surge,” arguing against the Navy’s apparent reliance on it to offset budget limitations.

In response to budget criticism, Secretary Phelan attempted to clarify the Navy’s funding strategy: “I think at the end of the day, we’re going to need both the mandatory and discretionary funding to operate in fiscal year 26 — so we call it one budget, two bills,” he said. “We need both in order to operate and meet our objectives.”

This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year

That answer did little to quell concern over the Navy’s progress on key platforms. Among the most pressing issues discussed was the delay in production of the Columbia-class nuclear submarine.

When questioned by Sen. Jack Reed, D–R.I., Adm. Kilby admitted that delivery of the first submarine in the class is now projected to be two years late.

“We now are on a pace to deliver that sub approximately two years late: March of 2029. We are trying desperately to claw back that schedule,” Kilby said, acknowledging the severity of the delay.

Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., issued the most pointed critique of the day. “Admiral, in the last two decades, we have doubled the amount of money we’ve given the Navy to build ships,” Kennedy said to Kilby.

“We’ve actually had fewer ships today because we’ve retired more than we’ve built. Tell me why in 30 seconds.”

Kilby responded bluntly: “The simple answer, sir, is we were building four DDGs [guided-missile destroyers] per year in the 1990s and we’re building two a year now.” He attributed the shortfall to increased shipbuilding costs and sluggish production. “We are behind in every ship class [by] different rates, but at least years,” he added.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., also voiced alarm over the strategic implications of China’s rapidly expanding naval fleet.

“I don’t know if it’s the right number, and I don’t know how long it’s going to take, but I do know this: China has 400 ships, and by 2030 they’re going to have 435. So we need to get on with it,” Graham said, urging the Navy to receive funding “from outside the budget top line” in order to meet shipbuilding priorities.

Despite the evident challenges, lawmakers pushed for more transparency and specific plans from Navy leadership. Kennedy, in particular, pressed the witnesses to produce “more concrete details” to back up any future funding requests.

“It’s possible to create more than one reconciliation bill,” he noted, “but planning is needed.”

The hearing revealed a fundamental disconnect between the Navy’s strategic ambitions and its fiscal planning, raising serious questions about whether current policies are sufficient to meet emerging threats.

While the Pentagon remains focused on deterring aggression in the Indo-Pacific, Congress appears poised to demand a more aggressive shipbuilding strategy—and the dollars to match.

Warning: Account balances and purchasing power no longer tell the same story. Know in 2 minutes if your retirement is working for you.