WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Roger Wicker, R-Miss., ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, today led his colleagues in a full committee hearing examining the nomination of Admiral Lisa M. Franchetti, USN, to become the next Chief of Naval Operations.

In his remarks, Wicker observed that China’s naval buildup and the United States’ shrinking navy leave our national defense as unprepared as it was in 1941.

“While China builds its maritime strength, American command of the sea is increasingly at risk …This crisis is nothing short of historic,” Wicker said.?“We are as unprepared for a strategic surprise from China as our Pacific fleet was for a Japanese attack on the eve of Pearl Harbor in 1941. We need to act.”

Specifically, Wicker outlined the need for substantial investment in the defense industrial base. Wicker has been a strong advocate for improving submarine construction and maintenance availabilities, especially in light of the Australia-United Kingdom-U.S. (AUKUS) agreement to share U.S. submarine technology. Wicker also raised ongoing challenges with surface ship repairs and amphibious warship procurement.

“We should be producing somewhere between 2.3 to 2.5 attack submarines a year to fulfill our own requirements as we implement AUKUS,” Wicker said. “Instead, we are down to building 1.2 attack submarines per year, as compared to the required 2.3 to 2.5. The path back toward 2 per year is based on hopes and wishes.”?

In his exchange with Admiral Franchetti, Wicker discussed the need to meet the navy’s submarine requirements while also fulfilling prospective AUKUS obligations. The Admiral agreed that the Navy is currently far from meeting minimum submarine requirements. Wicker also pressed the nominee for a commitment to advocate for block-buys of amphibious warships, an acquisition strategy that would save considerable amounts of taxpayer money, which she failed to provide.

Click here to view Senator Wicker’s exchange with Admiral Franchetti. Read Senator Wicker’s remarks as delivered below.  

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And thank you Admiral, for being here. Certainly, a welcome to your family – it’s good they were able to be with us today.

Your nomination comes at a pivotal moment for our Navy.?The National Defense Strategy rightly identifies China as our pacing threat, as the Chair just said. But as China grows its fleet to historic levels, our naval forces continue to shrink, and our readiness levels decline.

As the Chairman just said, when you add the numbers up, it amounts to our fleet going in to the wrong direction. A recent memo from the Office of Naval Intelligence office suggests that China’s shipbuilding capacity is more than 230 times larger than our own – I can hardly believe I’m speaking these words – 230 times larger in shipbuilding capacity. These are not comforting thoughts when we consider the growing number of general and flag officers who warn that China could be capable of invading Taiwan in the next two to four years.

While China builds its maritime strength, American command of the sea is increasingly at risk – and you and I have discussed this in our private meeting. So far, we have not made progress toward the statutory goal of 355-ships that I proposed and that was signed into law six years ago. Of course, we now know that we are being told by experts at the Department of Defense – both civilian and flag officers – that that number is more than 355 ships.

Additionally, surface ship maintenance delays and cost overruns are so routine that they are factored into our planning timetables. There are even some ships – like the USS Vicksburg – that have been in repair and modernization for seven years. It is as if the Navy never really means to get the Vicksburg back in action.?Chairman Reed is exactly right about the competing demands that we face. I am particularly pleased that he mentioned attack submarines and the need for Littoral Combat Ships.

The story of our attack submarines is this:?a recent press report revealed that over a third of the Navy’s attack submarines are unavailable as they enter repair cycles—that’s a third of our attack submarines. We should be producing somewhere between 2.3 to 2.5 attack submarines a year to fulfill our own requirements as we implement AUKUS. Instead, we are down to building 1.2 attack submarines per year, as compared to the required 2.3 to 2.5. The path back toward 2 per year is based on hopes and wishes.

This crisis is nothing short of historic.?We are as unprepared for a strategic surprise from China as our Pacific fleet was for a Japanese attack on the eve of Pearl Harbor in 1941. We need to act.

And let me say this, Admiral: I cherish our Constitution and our longstanding principle that goes back to George Washington, our uniformed military – which the Chairman and I were both a part of – are answerable to civilian elected leadership in this country, and that’s as it should be. It’s one of the shining examples. But also, the Constitution gives the power of the purse to the Congress. And so we sit here, under the Constitution, able to make decisions about purchasing power. The power of the purse does not rest in the Office of Management and Budget in the White House. There’s a competing interest there, and so I take this opportunity of your hearing today, to remind my colleagues also that it is we who have the responsibility to find the money you need to get you the Navy that will protect us and keep us at peace.

Admiral Franchetti, you served as Vice Chief of Naval Operations and as commander of the Sixth Fleet. These experiences make you deeply qualified and familiar with the problems our Navy faces. You also know just how damaging these delays are. In addition to the questions the Chair mentioned, I would appreciate your thoughts today on a way forward – especially for our submarines following the AUKUS agreement – as well as your commitment to work with this committee on the vital issue of ship maintenance.

A second challenge our Navy faces is fielding new technical solutions at what former Secretary of Defense Mattis called the “speed of relevance,” in other words within a time window speedily enough that keeps us ahead of our adversaries. Industry and naval research have made major breakthroughs in unmanned warfare, additive manufacturing, and maritime mines in only the past few years. If we have any hope of shoring up our eroding deterrence in the Western Pacific, it will take the rapid integration of these capabilities at scale in the next two years or so. Again, Admiral Franchetti, I would like to hear from you how the Navy plans to achieve this integration at the speed of relevance.

The Navy has always been our first line of defense, keeping the peace by deterring war and protecting the national interest. This goes as far back as our founding.

Admiral Franchetti, I know that you agree with these sentiments, and I am hopeful you will keep them mind as you stand for this important position. I look forward to your testimony and hearing more about your vision for our Navy’s future.

Your tenure can be a turning point in our national defense, and I hope it is. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.