But this time, the Pentagon is in a hurry. The Iran war has exposed the problem of relying on costly long-range missiles such as the Tomahawk. To remedy that, DoD is putting out a call for long-range, autonomously guided Ground-Based Affordable Mass, or GBAM, weapons that cost less than $250,000 apiece.

The Pentagon also wants the GBAM munitions to be ready for demonstration within three months, and full-scale production within 18 months.

The goal of the GBAM initiative is to supplement expensive smart munitions with “affordable, scalable long-range effects, and “enable commanders to service a broader target set, preserve exquisite munitions for their intended purpose, and sustain operational tempo throughout a prolonged conflict.”

To facilitate that, the Defense Innovation Unit has created the GBAM Challenge. Contestants will pitch ideas in the form of a pitch deck or white paper, with a deadline of Aug. 5.

Winning teams will be invited to a Phase II flight demonstration at a government test site in early November, where they will give a 30-minute presentation — and get a $250,000 cash prize.

The top Phase II contenders may receive up to $5 million “to immediately deliver operational test quantities to units.” They may also be eligible for other funds, including Prototype Other Transaction agreements, follow-on production contracts and Small Business Innovation Research awards.

“In total, the government has budgeted up to $250 million to support prize execution and follow-on transition activities associated with this effort,” DIU pointed out.

However, grabbing that pot of gold will require much work. For starters, the timeline is tight. The Pentagon wants “mature, affordable, long-range precision strike systems that can be demonstrated within 60 to 90 days, certified, and scaled into production within 12 to 18 months.”

DIU doesn’t specify whether GBAM will be a missile or a drone, though it does say GBAM will be “aligned with the Direct Reporting Portfolio Manager for Unmanned Systems (DRPM-UxS) mandate to field low-cost autonomous capabilities at scale.”

Either way, the U.S. military wants a “favorable cost-per-effect at operationally relevant ranges while minimizing the logistical, training, and sustainment burden on employing units.” This means a ground-launched weapon with a range of at least 600 nautical miles, and a minimum payload of 35 pounds while ideally allowing for 100 pounds.

It should have automatic target recognition and autonomous terminal guidance, and be “ideally mission-proven” to function in jamming and GPS-denied environments. This includes “Alternative Position, Navigation, and Timing (PNT) or redundant navigation capabilities suitable for GPS/GNSS-denied operations in maritime and other ‘feature-poor’ environments.”

DIU is also looking for a weapon that doesn’t require any proprietary launch equipment, with “remote and low-signature launch methods strongly preferred.”

Companies should have an “existing production capacity or credible path to producing 100+ systems monthly.” And with a price tag of “cost-per-effect below $500,000 based on system reliability and mission success rate, with a sub-$250,000 all-up flyaway cost at scale.”

In addition to GBAM, the U.S. military is pursuing other strike weapons that don’t cost as much as traditional missiles, and can be mass produced as needed. They include the Family of Affordable Mass Missiles, or FAMM-BAR, program to launch cruise missiles from cargo planes, as well as the Low-Cost Containerized Missiles hypersonic weapons program.

In its updated accounting method, the Defense Casualty Analysis System’s category labeled “Overseas Operations (OO) Casualty Summary” lists U.S. casualties suffered in the conflict since July 7 — effectively removing the totals from those associated with Operation Epic Fury.

The new page comes in the wake of criticism that the Pentagon had dropped the number of U.S. troops killed and wounded in the war with Iran.

On July 17 three U.S. service members were killed when an Iranian missile hit their sleeping barracks at Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan. The fourth death occurred two days later in a separate incident in Erbil, Iraq, during a controlled detonation of an attack drone.

The Pentagon initially updated its system to 18 killed before lowering that number to 14 once again.

On July 23, Sean Parnell, the chief Pentagon spokesman, refuted a New York Times article on the lowering of the KIA number, writing on X that “Our Pentagon Press Office gave the New York Times a courtesy off-the-record phone call explaining in detail that the site errors on the Defense Casualty Analysis System (DCAS) were due to a temporary data disruption. Our team explained we are working on it being resolved in coordination with the Military Services.”

Under the “overseas operations” system, the Pentagon reports that 207 U.S. service members have been wounded in action. It lists 417 wounded during Operation Epic Fury. Combined, the two categories account for 624 wounded service members. The total number listed as killed is 18.

The post-July 7 tally comes one day prior to the collapse of the tenuous June ceasefire agreement between the U.S. and Iran, resulting in U.S. Central Command delivering 13 continuous nightly strikes against the Middle East nation.

The collapse of the ceasefire, the Trump administration argued, restarted the 60-day clock that allows the president to use military force without congressional approval.

The new accounting system is in line with President Donald Trump’s assertion that the latest escalation between the U.S. and Iran is part of a new conflict with the Islamic Republic, not a continuation of the one that began in February.

On July 10, the president formally notified Congress that hostilities with Iran had resumed, a position that administration officials contend allows them to bypass the War Powers Resolution and restart the clock again on the war.

In April, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth controversially claimed that the ceasefire with Iran meant that Trump did not yet have to seek congressional consent to extend the war.

Hegseth argued that the pause in hostilities froze the ticking clock that would otherwise require the president either to get agreement from lawmakers or to end military operations after 60 days.

“We are in a ceasefire right now, which [in] our understanding means the 60-day clock pauses, or stops,” Hegseth told Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing.

“I do not believe the statute would support that,” Kaine said, adding that he has “serious constitutional concerns and we don’t want to layer those with additional statutory concerns.”

Congress has not technically declared war since World War II, and yet more than 100,000 service members have died in conflicts spanning the globe since 1945.

In May 2026, South Carolina enacted Act 186 with overwhelming bipartisan support. Under an Americans with Disabilities Act framework, the law guarantees that autistic children can receive medically necessary behavioral health support, specifically Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) therapy, inside public-school classrooms.

It was designed to ensure that no child must forfeit their public education to access required medical care.

Yet, active-duty military families stationed at Joint Base Charleston and across the state are being stripped of this protection.

The Defense Health Agency (DHA), operating through TRICARE’s Autism Care Demonstration (ACD), continues to enforce a rigid “School Exclusion” rule.

Under this administrative posture, TRICARE completely cuts off provider reimbursement the moment a behavior technician steps onto public school property. While civilian families with commercial insurance benefit from state law protections, military families face an impossible ultimatum: Either pull their children out of public school to maintain therapy in a clinical setting or drop medically necessary care so their children can attend school alongside their peers.

The operational cost of this bureaucratic conflict is staggering.

Summer 2026 field survey data from The Military Family Advocacy Group reveals that 100% of surveyed active-duty, mid-career operators navigating these TRICARE autism denials are actively planning early separation from military service.

When a specialized EOD technician or fighter pilot is consumed by an exhausting administrative war at home just to secure standard healthcare for their child, mission focus fractures and unit lethality suffers. The military spends millions of dollars and years of specialized training to build these operators, only to lose them over a TRICARE setting restriction.

Adding insult to injury is the financial cost-shift onto local taxpayers.

Denied in-school coverage by TRICARE, 80% of surveyed military families have been forced to enroll their dependents onto state-funded Medicaid waivers to cover essential care. This shifts an estimated $6,383 annual net tax burden per child directly onto South Carolina taxpayers for care that a federal defense program should be providing.

This systemic breakdown is not inevitable; it is the result of administrative intransigence.

In 2025, a comprehensive report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) recommended that the Defense Health Agency discontinue the 12-year ACD “demonstration” status, authorize ABA as a standard TRICARE Basic benefit, remove arbitrary setting exclusions and eliminate onerous assessment mandates.

Because the Defense Health Agency has repeatedly failed to self-correct or adopt these independent scientific recommendations, Congress must step in.

As lawmakers finalize the fiscal 2027 National Defense Authorization Act, they must include statutory language that legally compels the secretary of defense to terminate the ACD demonstration status, align TRICARE with NASEM standards and prohibit the Defense Health Agency from restricting medically necessary care based on geographic or educational settings.

South Carolina has done its part to protect military children. It is now time for federal lawmakers to enforce those protections, end the school exclusion rule and preserve the readiness of our total force.

Mariah Wilkins is the executive director and principal policy advisor of The Military Family Advocacy Group.

Around 5,200 Army, Navy and Air Force enlisted students assigned to the Medical Education and Training Campus, or METC, at Joint Base San Antonio-Fort Sam Houston are being moved to on-base temporary housing, the San Antonio Express-News was first to report.

Their barracks face construction failures, which is forcing them to be demolished and ultimately reconstructed, a base spokesperson told Military Times.

Instead of normal wear and tear, “systemic infrastructure failures” rooted in their construction are causing the need to tear down the METC dormitories. The spokesperson said that the facilities have experienced persistent issues with their climate control systems, and the structural flaws in the building cannot be permanently resolved through routine maintenance or ongoing repairs.

“It has been determined that a complete teardown and transition to traditionally built facilities is the most responsible course of action,” the spokesperson said.

The METC dorms finished construction in 2014 using modular building methods meant to enhance efficiency and reduce onsite labor requirements to boost the project timelines.

The construction cost $140 million for each 1,200-person dormitory, according to the construction company tasked with the project. The company completed five multi-story barracks for METC.

The relocation is occurring in phases, with roughly 2,000 students moved since July 11. The spokesperson did not specify when all students are expected to be relocated but did say that construction is slated to begin by the end of 2026.

The base is utilizing existing infrastructure and transportation networks to allow for the students to maintain their training schedules, the spokesperson said.

Rep. Joaquin Castro, D-Texas, whose district houses JBSA-Lackland and parts of Fort Sam Houston, said in a release that the Department of Defense told his office five base barracks will be replaced due to mold, humidity and construction issues.

Castro said that the barracks’ demolishment is set for September, and the project is expected to cost over $1.4 billion in fiscal years 2027 and 2028.

“It’s critical that the Pentagon not repeat the construction mistakes of the past and provide quality housing that meets the needs of our servicemembers,” he said in the statement.

The move to replace these barracks follows the October 2025 creation of the Barracks Task Force by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, which aims to improve service members’ living conditions and quality of life.

The base spokesperson said the Pentagon is investing more than $1.2 billion immediately into the improvement of the METC barracks. The $1.2 billion matches the initial amount invested across the services to overhaul barracks’ conditions, alongside granting local commanders more than $400 million to direct immediate work and more than $800 million in critical barracks renovations.

A Government Accountability Office 2023 report found that concerns about poor living conditions in military barracks and its management date back decades, with issues such as safety risks from sewage overflow, inoperable fire systems and a lack of reliable information from the Defense Department on how low-quality conditions affect troop morale.

“Our primary focus is ensuring every service member has a clean, comfortable, and safe living space so that they can focus on their training and mission,” the spokesperson said. “This relocation will allow the medical training pipeline to continue without compromise.”

Students are slated to move back onto campus once the reconstruction is complete.

Admiral, who currently serves as the commander of III Corps and Fort Hood, Texas, could take over the top job from Gen. Christopher Donahue, who unexpectedly relinquished command earlier this month after only 18 months in the role. Since Donahue’s exit, Maj. Gen. Christopher Norrie has been serving as acting commander.

If confirmed, Admiral would also serve as commander of NATO’s Allied Land Command, coordinating with 104 countries in USAREUR-AF’s area of responsibility. He would remain a three-star, despite the role previously being a four-star position.

Prior to leading III Corps and Fort Hood, Admiral served as the commanding general for the 1st Cavalry Division out of Fort Hood, Texas, and in Poland, and director of force management in the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff, G-3/5/7, according to his official Army bio.

Donahue’s early July departure came amid the Pentagon’s broad senior leadership changes under Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, who in April asked U.S. Army Chief of Staff Gen. Randy George to step down and retire ahead of the typical four-year term.

Since taking office, Hegseth has removed more than a dozen senior military leaders, including former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. C.Q. Brown and former Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Lisa Franchetti.

Eve Sampson contributed to this report.

The “Readiness Simulation” project comes as the U.S. government is about to change its draft registration system.

Since 1940, men within a designated age range have been required to register with the Selective Service. But under a proposed rule, men aged 18 to 26 will be automatically registered starting Dec. 19, 2026. The Selective Service System will work off data contained in other federal databases.

Questions remain about how prepared the Selective Service System is to handle the change.

“SSS currently relies on manual analysis, legacy modeling approaches, outdated assumptions, and historical datasets that do not fully reflect modern demographics, communications channels, throughput constraints, or operational readiness conditions,” warned the agency in a Request for Quote for the Readiness Simulation tool.

The deadline for vendors to propose their simulation models is Aug. 14.

The computer simulation will explore multiple areas. These include evaluating staffing and resource requirements, comparing mobilization and police scenarios and assessing the operational impact of surge conditions. In addition, the system will “identify throughput risks, delays, and bottlenecks” and support executive planning and reporting obligations.

The goal is a simulation system that “models the full end-to-end SSS mobilization pipeline, supports configurable scenarios, and provides decision-support analytics necessary for leadership, planners, and operators.”

Scenarios will encompass draft registration, selection, notification, delivery and classification. They will also cover the Alternative Service Program, which includes various forms of community service as well as conscientious objectors.

Computer models will “represent MEPS [Military Entrance Processing Stations] throughput, no-shows, medical disqualification rates, claims processing, and ASP diversion,” according to the Request for Quote.

Contractors must be prepared to run the Readiness Simulation while “recognizing that legacy SSS draft data may be outdated or unreliable,” the agency said.

A draft registration system based on data compiled by — and accessed from — other federal agencies is likely to raise privacy concerns.

The computer simulation “shall operate within an SSS-designated cloud environment, use anonymized aggregate data, and support complete Government ownership and sustainment,” the agency said.

The simulation must also comply with multiple privacy regulations.

Sgt. Darilyn C. Duong, a DI with the 3rd Recruit Training Battalion, was found in her apartment in Port Royal, just north of the installation. She was 25 years old.

The cause of death is currently under investigation, Marine spokesperson 2nd Lt. Joshua Hartley said in a statement.

“The Marine Corps extends its deepest condolences to the family, friends and fellow Marines affected by this loss,” Hartley said. “At this time, it would be premature to speculate on the circumstances or results of the investigation. ... Out of respect for the Marine’s family and loved ones, no additional details will be released at this time.”

A native of Winnebago, Nebraska, Duong is the second drill instructor assigned to Parris Island to be found dead in as many months.

On May 30, Sgt. Albert Haynes II, 24, was found dead in a hotel room in Starke, Florida, where he was staying while attending a poolee function with U.S. Marine Corps Recruiting Station-Jacksonville.

Duong, who was single with no dependents, enlisted in the Marine Corps as a Food Service Specialist before becoming a drill instructor.

Her awards include the Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, the Navy Meritorious Unit Commendation, two Sea Service Deployment Ribbons, two Good Conduct Medals and the National Defense Service Medal.

The COMPACT Act allows eligible veterans and certain former service members to receive Veterans Affairs-funded emergency suicide crisis care at VA and community hospitals, even if they aren’t enrolled in VA healthcare. New data obtained by Military Times show 49,341 veterans have used the benefit since 2023, but veteran advocates and suicide prevention professionals say many eligible veterans still don’t realize it exists until they experience a crisis.

In 2025, retired Navy Master Chief David Hull’s life unraveled after he lost his job during the government shutdown.

The transition from military service had been difficult, but he had rebuilt his life. Then when his paycheck disappeared, so did his ability to provide for his three children.

“I didn’t always consider taking my own life,” Hull said. “It wasn’t until I felt like I had no one and nowhere to go.”

“It’s easy to sink into feeling nothingness when you can’t see your value anymore or you become disconnected from your purpose,” he said.

After putting his children to bed one night, Hull searched online for combinations of pills that promised an easier way to end his life. As he poured medication into a single bottle, he accidentally knocked the empty container onto the floor.

His 6-year-old daughter picked it up.

“She looked up at me with her big brown eyes,” Hull recalled, his voice breaking. “It cracked me wide open.”

Hull left his children with a neighbor and drove to Garrett Regional Medical Center, a community hospital in Oakland, Maryland.

He wasn’t enrolled in VA healthcare. He didn’t have health insurance. Until that night, he had never heard of the COMPACT Act or that eligible veterans could receive VA-funded emergency suicide crisis care at a community hospital.

“I just needed someone to help clear my head and get me straight again,” Hull said. “I was circling the drain. On the precipice of having no home, no food, no money and no job with a promise of a better tomorrow. Nothing.”

About 40 minutes after arriving, Hull was evaluated by an emergency physician, who assured him he would be taken care of. A hospital social worker then explained that the Department of Veterans Affairs would cover the cost of his emergency treatment and follow-up care.

“I was shocked to find out that I could be seen for free after they identified me as a veteran,” Hull said.

In 2020, Congress signed the COMPACT Act Emergent Suicide Crisis Benefit into law to remove financial and administrative barriers to emergency suicide crisis care. Three years later, it was implemented by the VA, but many eligible veterans remain unaware of the benefit until they need it, veteran advocates and suicide prevention professionals told Military Times.

A lifeline beyond VA’s doors

The Emergency Suicide Crisis Benefit was established under the Commander John Scott Hannon Veterans Mental Health Care Improvement Act, or COMPACT Act. Coverage includes emergency evaluation, treatment, inpatient or crisis residential care when clinically appropriate, and up to 90 days of outpatient follow-up care.

According to data provided by VA, nearly 50,000 veterans have received the Emergency Suicide Crisis Benefit since fiscal 2023, including just over 10,000 in fiscal 2023. 14,666 receieved the benefit in fiscal 2024; 15,218 in fiscal 2025; and 9,434 during the first half of fiscal 2026.

“The number of Veterans receiving the COMPACT Act’s Emergent Suicide Crisis Benefit has grown steadily since its inception in FY23,” VA Press Secretary Quinn Slaven said.

VA spent a record of nearly $110 million on acute suicide crisis care during fiscal 2025.

Slaven said VA reviews eligible cases to ensure veterans receive the benefit, educates veterans and community emergency department staff about its availability and works with providers so eligible veterans do not receive unexpected medical bills after crisis care.

According to VA, 72% of veterans who have used the benefit have since enrolled in VA healthcare.

Misconceptions persist

Despite growing use of the benefit, the Disabled American Veterans, or DAV, organization says many eligible veterans still misunderstand who qualifies for emergency suicide crisis care.

“DAV believes awareness of the safety net created by the COMPACT Act remains lower than it should be,” Jon Retzer, DAV’s national legislative director, said.

Retzer said DAV service officers routinely meet veterans who believe they must already be enrolled in VA healthcare, have a service-connected disability rating or seek treatment at a VA medical center before the benefit applies.

“Many veterans remain uncertain whether an emergency room visit will generate medical debt or whether VA will ultimately cover the care,” Retzer said. “That uncertainty can discourage veterans from seeking treatment during a crisis when immediate intervention is critical.”

Retzer urged veterans experiencing a suicidal crisis to seek emergency care first and allow VA to determine eligibility afterward.

Army Reserve Prevention Integrator David Arthur said those same misconceptions continue to surface in his work, particularly among older veterans.

He said distance from a VA medical center can create uncertainty because many rural veterans live an hour or more away, while nearby outpatient clinics do not provide emergency services.

“When they are in a crisis, in my experience with suicidal soldiers and vets, they are not even thinking about that,” Arthur said. “But those thoughts are huge barriers, especially the cost.”

“I want every vet to know they can go to any ER or hospital,” Arthur continued.

Returning to care

Hull completed the full 90 days of follow-up care available through the benefit before enrolling in VA healthcare.

“I don’t know if I could have afforded the treatment I received after that night without the VA,” Hull said. “And I don’t know that I’d be enrolled with the VA now without the care I experienced.”

“I wish so many of my brothers and sisters knew that this was an option,” Hull said. “It doesn’t matter if you have insurance. It doesn’t matter if you’re a patient in the VA system. None of that matters. There are no strings attached. No barriers to being seen. This is a gift that every veteran needs to know they’re eligible for.”

Beginning June 1, 2026, individuals may qualify for several different bonus enlistment packages from the Navy Reserve as part of the fiscal 2026/2027 Recruiting and Retention Incentive Program.

“Our people remain our greatest competitive advantage,” said Capt. James R. Prouty, commander of Navy Recruiting Reserve Command. “These expanded bonus opportunities represent a well spent investment in both the current force and the next generation of reserve sailors.”

For the latter, the programs include the New Accession Training Enlistment Bonus, Reserve Component Affiliation Bonus, Prior Service Reenlistment Bonus and Selective Retention Bonus.

NAT applies to individuals with no prior service who sign up for the reserve; RCAB targets active-duty sailors transitioning to the reserve; PSRB encompasses civilians who previously served in the military looking to rejoin; and SRB applies to reenlisting sailors who currently serve in military occupational specialties the Navy considers critical to maintaining readiness.

Enlisted sailors can make up to $20,000 in bonuses depending on the initiative they qualify for.

Officers, on the other hand, are eligible to sign up for the Officer Affiliation Bonus, Officer Accession (Direct Commission Officer) Bonus and Officer Retention Bonus.

OAB applies to former active-duty officers or officers from other military branches who join the Navy Reserve, while the direct commission officer bonus applies to civilians from specialized career fields like lawyers and doctors who directly enter the reserve as a commissioned officer. ORB includes officers already serving in the reserve in designated communities who choose to remain.

“Eligible officers may receive affiliation bonuses of up to $10,000, direct commission accession bonuses of $12,000, and retention bonuses of up to $12,000 annually for three years in designated communities,” the service said.

The Navy hopes that the potential financial windfall will prove particularly effective at convincing active-duty service members and prior service members to join the reserve.

The move comes amid a continued push by the Navy to recruit and reenlist qualified candidates by reaching further into its pockets.

The service announced financial incentives for select Navy reservist aviators in June that reached as high as $40,000 in annual bonuses.

After whiffing on its active-duty recruiting goal in fiscal 2023, the Navy accomplished a massive turnaround, bringing in the largest number of new accessions in almost 25 years in fiscal 2025.

At the time, head of Navy Recruiting Command Rear Adm. James Waters partially chalked the success up to quicker tattoo approvals for prospective sailors and ads that targeted individuals with an interest in Naval special operations.

The Navy enlisted Navy 44,096 future sailors in fiscal 2025, almost 3,500 more than its target of 40,600.

In June, the Navy announced that it had hit its fiscal 2026 recruiting goals of 45,000 new sailors three months early, continuing its success of injecting new blood into the service.

The relatively small plane required numerous and specific refueling stops at remote locations. But one leg of the trip — from the tip of Alaska’s Aleutian Island chain to Misawa, Japan — cannot be completed without carrying additional fuel onboard, Vogel said.

“It’s a little bit of a nail-biting experience to make sure that your fuel transfers properly and that your engines are running properly,” he said, adding that the flight’s emergency diversion option was Russia, and even that stopped being a possibility after a certain point.

Three pilots shared the workload, taking turns cycling up to the cockpit as barrels of gas were being pumped into the aircraft in the rear. Watching the plane’s fuel gauge tick up above zero, he said, was a massive relief.

The C-2 Greyhound made its final carrier landing at the end of June, capping off its mission as the Navy’s only carrier delivery passenger plane. The mission will now be conducted by the CMV-22, the Navy’s version of the tiltrotor V-22 Osprey.

On Thursday, the Norfolk, Virginia-based Fleet Logistics Support Squadron VRC-40, the last active C-2 squadron, will commemorate the aircraft with a special sundown ceremony. The final flight of the last C-2 is set to happen before the end of the month: a transit to its final home, the National Naval Aviation Museum in Pensacola, Florida.

Despite a no-fail mission to get VIPs and important cargo on and off carriers, the C-2 community is tiny, making up less than 1% of naval aviators, according to pilots who spoke with Military Times. Between 1,000 and 1,500 pilots have flown the aircraft since its first flight in 1960, Vogel said, a relatively small number in the scheme of naval aviation. That sense of eliteness, coupled with the way VRC squadrons conducted their overseas missions — with small detachments of two aircraft and about 50 personnel led by a lieutenant commander — fueled the development of a scrappy and self-reliant culture.

“I don’t think there’s anywhere else in the conventional military where so much is on such a junior group,” Cmdr. Paul “PETA” Ingram, the last commanding officer of VRC-40, said. “You’re operating independently overseas. You have to understand the Law of the Seas [and] the rules for international flying because there’s nobody there, nobody you can call on the radio back home, and nobody’s following you. You’re by yourself out there.”

Though C-2s caught the wire to land on a carrier and were catapult-launched off, just like fighter jets, they lacked the sophisticated computers and technology that have been added to platforms like the F/A-18 Super Hornet. C-2 pilots flew by controlling cables connected to hydraulic actuators, a throwback to a prior era.

“It’s a bit of a bear to fly, but at the same time … there’s no computers between you and the air, so it’s kind of unique in modern aviation to still be flying something that does that,” Ingram said, describing the plane as a “dinosaur.”

“It gives you just a sense of kind of pounding the air into submission,” he continued.

Ingram said he relished the rare vistas and unusual places that the work of C-2 crews gave them the chance to experience.

“Hands down, my favorite moment is just coming back from the ship, flying west from the North Arabian Sea into a sunset that just goes on forever because you’re chasing it over the Omani Mountains,” he said. There’s nothing quite like that — a sense of accomplishment; you just completed your mission — and then landing back home."

The twin turboprop engine, high-wing Greyhound can carry up to 28 passengers, their seats facing the rear of the plane rather than the cockpit to absorb some of the shock of landing on the carrier. Passengers can be heads of state, journalists, foreign visitors or nonaviator service members, and the flight sometimes takes a toll. An arrested landing takes the plane from up to 138 miles per hour to a dead stop in less than two seconds. The catapult takeoff reverses that process. Nausea is not uncommon.

James Wallace, who flew the C-2 from 1979 to 1982, said the crew always tried to be on their best behavior, despite a plane that even then was often dingy and worn. He recalled crews carefully briefing the “always apprehensive” passengers, while trying to avoid getting dressed down by any senior officers who might be on board.

Once, he said, his crew transported the then-chief of naval operations, who later wrote a letter to the squadron to complain that the loadmaster had been chewing gum during the flight.

Vogel said the opportunity to give the carrier landing experience to enlisted troops and others who might never have it was one of the joys of flying the C-2.

“For all tailhook aviators, the most exciting thing you can do is land on the ship or take a catapult shot from the ship. And our platform is extremely unique in that we can provide that opportunity for 20 plus passengers at a time to experience what it feels like to land with a tailhook or take off with a catapult,” he said.

“And so having the opportunity to do that for everything from Make-A-Wish kids to high school teachers to foreign dignitaries of other nations is really rewarding — to be able to talk to them before the flight, and then after the flight, when they’ve you know finally experienced what what we get to do every couple of days," he continued. “It’s really fun to see that transformation.”

That experience is now largely extinct: The Osprey, which lands and takes off vertically like a helicopter, doesn’t use the arresting wire or catapult.

The members of VRC-40 are now taking diverging paths. Some are transitioning to the Osprey community or to other platforms including the Super Hornet and the E-2 Hawkeye tactical early warning aircraft, which is fairly similar to the C-2. Others, like Vogel, are opting to retire.

They expect a crowd of 700 to attend the sundown event in Norfolk. A follow-up sundown event to reunite the community is already planned; it will be held Sept. 4-5 in San Diego, and details can be found at C2Sundown.com.

“It’s going to be emotional, I’ll tell you that much,” Vogel said of the upcoming events. “When we left the carrier for the final time about a month ago, all of us were pretty choked up flying away because it really signified the end of an era in naval aviation and our own lives … [but] we’re not going to stop seeing each other. That’s for sure.”

Across the board, childcare providers struggle with financial issues, with about one in five reporting food insecurity, and about one-third struggling with debt.

Childcare providers across the board are experiencing high levels of stress and depression, researchers with the Buffett Early Childhood Institute at the University of Nebraska found.

In looking at potential solutions to bolster the military childcare provider work force, researchers also noted that poor access to behavioral support is a major reason for turnover, and there’s a high level of acting-out behaviors among children in military childcare.

The research, conducted by the Buffett Early Childhood Institute, provides more insight into military and civilian childcare providers, their needs and their differences.

Among other findings, the researchers determined that a one-time retention bonus of $500 would retain six out of 10 of those who were at risk of leaving for another year.

“You’d be shocked at how little it would take to keep them,” said Walter Gilliam, executive director of the Buffett Early Childhood Institute. “It’s because they want to stay.”

A societal issue

If there aren’t enough childcare providers, fewer children can get care. Access to affordable, high-quality childcare is key to their quality of life, to service members’ readiness and to military readiness, said those who spoke at congressional briefings this week held by the institute, in partnership with the National Military Family Association.

While childcare is a readiness issue for the current force, it’s also a readiness issue for the future force, since many military children follow in the footsteps of their military parents.

Sabrina Dalton, the wife of a Space Force guardian, said she was a preschool teacher until her first child was born more than 11 years ago. She left the work force after failing to find infant care. For her family, like many others in the military, they had many discussions about how to make the numbers work, weighing childcare costs and employment, she said.

But for eight years, until they moved to a state with free pre-Kindergarten for her youngest, she was out of the work force. They were never able to secure on-base childcare.

Dalton, who is the chief operating officer for Operation Child Care Project, said many of the spouses who seek them out to discuss childcare are also struggling with food insecurity and other issues, such as credit card debt, that are related to the effect the lack of childcare has on spouse employment.

As defense officials, lawmakers, private organizations and others have worked for decades to find ways to fill in the gaps of childcare, there has been more of a focus on recruiting and retaining childcare providers.

Stephen Simmons, deputy assistant secretary of defense for military community and family policy, said defense officials have worked on overhauling the compensation models for military child care providers and have been hiring specialists who can help with special needs, such as behavioral problems, in military child care centers.

Since June 2025, different efforts have reduced the amount of unmet need from 12,000 child care spaces to about 9,000 on wait lists across the Defense Department, Simmons said.

Half of the unmet need is located at about 20 installations, he said. And the problem can’t be solved solely by building more child development centers, which can take six years in the military construction process.

This need for child care is a societal issue, being felt across the country, Simmons said, with local, regional and national shortages of child care providers.

Those employees are critical to providing child care of high quality for military children.

“We’re going to change the idea that daycare is where you park a kid so a parent can go to work,” said Raleigh Duttweiler, chief impact officer of the National Military Family Association.

These are the most formative years of a child’s life, and they deserve to be in high quality childcare, she said.

‘It’s a calling’

According to results of the 2023 research — made public at briefings this week — of the 91 on-base military childcare providers who were surveyed, 63% of those said low pay is the leading reason for leaving the field, compared to 54.8% of the 231 military providers off base and 63.8% of the 24,285 non-military child care providers.

The on-base providers were indeed twice as likely to have actually left the field in the previous year as those off base, with 33% reporting leaving in the previous year.

Yet, military childcare providers are more committed to the field, with 51% of on-base providers planning to make it their careers.

For many of these employees, Simmons said, “It’s a calling.”

Many of the on-base providers are also older and more experienced, Gilliam said. On-base providers had a median of 20 years of experience in the field, compared to 18 years for military providers off base, and 16 years for non-military providers.

The down side, Gilliam noted, is that they also may be getting closer to retirement.

It’s unclear how many of the providers who left the field did so because of permanent change of station moves, since some are military spouses.

As troops struggle to find child care, 24-hour centers offer help

In addition to retention bonuses, another solution is to provide better access to support in dealing with children who have challenging behaviors.

Researchers found that a major reason for provider turnover is poor access to behavioral support. That access is “very weak” in off-base military child care programs, they found. More than half of those programs permanently expelled at least one child in the previous year, compared to one-third of on-base programs and 39% of non-military programs.

The rates of children’s mental health concerns are also greatest in off-base care, although about half of classrooms across the board reported that at least half or more of the children in their classrooms were “externalizing” their problems, or acting out.

More off-base military providers and non-military providers reported that children were internalizing problems, or exhibiting physical signs, such as unexplained headaches or stomach aches.

According to the most recent Blue Star Families Military Lifestyle Survey, 20% of active duty families with children have at least one child receiving mental health care, and another 13% would like for their child to receive care.

Other findings of the research into child care providers include:

• Stress is high across the board among providers, with the highest rate, 24%, reported in on-base providers, followed by 23% in non-military and 18% in off-base military providers.
• Depression rates are also high across the board, with about one-third of providers screening positive for depression.
• On-base providers and those providing care for military children off base are also more likely to have childcare credentials. Nearly half hold a Child Development Associate credential, the most widely recognized credential in early childhood education.
• On-base providers have better benefits, with nearly 60% having access to health insurance, 65% with retirement benefits, 54% with paid family leave and 42% with access to employee assistance programs.

The awards, according to a NavAdmin, recognize those who have “significantly influenced the future of naval expeditionary warfare and amphibious capabilities” through innovation, leadership and teamwork. As part of the process, each service recognizes one enlisted and one officer from each branch.

On the Navy side, Lt. Cmdr. Tyler Biggs, Amphibious Squadron Eight, has been named the Expeditionary Warfare Officer of the Year.

Petty Officer 1st Class Bryant Campos, Joint Communications Unit, has been named the service’s Expeditionary Warfare Enlisted Sailor of the Year.

Marine Corps Maj. Nicholas Leeds, 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit/Iwo Jima Amphibious Ready Group, has earned the service’s Expeditionary Warfare Officer of the Year award.

And the winner of the Marine Corps Expeditionary Warfare Staff Non-Commissioned Officer of the Year is Master Sgt. Patrick Keeling, 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit/Iwo Jima Amphibious Ready Group.

Amphibious Squadron Eight, one of three tactical amphibious squadrons in the Naval Surface Force, was commanded until June by Capt. Christopher Farricker, who also helmed the Iwo Jima Amphibious Ready Group during its recent 10-month deployment within the U.S. Southern Command area of responsibility.

The 22nd MEU, embarked with the Iwo Jima ARG, deployed from Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, last August and headed for the Caribbean, where personnel took part in Operation Southern Spear, the Pentagon’s campaign to combat what it has labeled as narcoterrorist operations to push illicit drugs into the United States.

The Iwo Jima ARG made headlines earlier this year when it took part in the Jan. 3 capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

“I’ve been acting for 39 years and made many movies and TV shows,” he says. “I have a deep connection to all of them, but I certainly don’t have one I talk about 25 years later like this one.”

Based on the 1992 bestselling nonfiction book by Stephen Ambrose, the monumental miniseries tracked the service of soldiers in Easy Company of the 506th Parachute Infantry Regiment of the 101st Airborne Division from Normandy to Berchtesgaden in World War II. The show’s gritty authenticity and immersive storytelling made it an instant hit with critics and viewers alike.

Premiering on Sept. 9, 2001, “Band of Brothers was created by director Steven Spielberg and actor Tom Hanks, who were both involved in the 1998 film “Saving Private Ryan.” Two days after the first episode aired, the United States was rocked by the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The series served as rallying point for a grieving country by showing how Americans responded to a similar challenge decades earlier.

“I remember 9/11 and ‘Band of Brothers’ very vividly,” says historian Adam Coste of the National WWII Museum in New Orleans, which is sponsoring a “Band of Brothers” 25th Anniversary Symposium July 31 and Aug. 1. “Those seminal moments confirmed for me the path I was going to take into the military, where I served 11 years as an Army officer. Watching the series at the time influenced me and my generation of veterans because it emphasized brotherhood over combat.”

“Band of Brothers” also set the bar higher for films and series depicting the bloody reality of war and is now considered the gold standard for all such productions. The actors portrayed real citizen soldiers from across the United States who signed up as paratroopers in the “Screaming Eagles” division to fight fascism. The series shows these young men as determined and ordinary individuals who strove to do their duty with bravery.

“‘Band of Brothers’ was never about celebrity, it was about legacy,” says McCall, who portrayed PFC Joseph Liebgott. “It was a legacy about a particular company of men. Somehow, we managed to follow in their footsteps and tell their stories. We knew what was on the line and what we had to do.”

James Madio, who played T-4 Frank J. Perconte, realized early what they were doing was special. The entire group of actors had to participate in a grueling 10-day “basic training” before filming started so they could get a sense of what soldiers in Easy Company experienced.

“We were up every morning at 5:30 to do PT,” he recalls. “We wore dog tags and marched to the set singing each day. We went through weapons training and learned the manual of arms. We went on long marches with heavy backpacks and bivouacked outdoors. It was an incredible experience and all the actors bonded together during it.”

Since Perconte was still alive when the series went into production, Madio was able to query his “soldier” about his wartime service and get insight into his character. He also developed a close personal relationship with the elderly Army veteran that endured long after filming was completed. Perconte asked Madio to accompany him to Europe on a tour of the battle sites of the 506th Parachute Infantry Regiment during World War II.

“The friendship was number one for me,” Madio says. “I wanted his trust and I wanted his friendship. I looked up to him and that generation.”

Tim Matthews didn’t have the opportunity to meet his character, Alex M. Penkala Jr. The Army private was killed in action Jan. 10, 1945, in Belgium during the Battle of the Bulge. The actor-turned-acting-teacher admits to not having much dialog but points out the death of his soldier — as well as others in episode 7 — had a important impact on the show.

“The series is very much a wider story about a whole company,” Matthews says. “This episode shows how the morale of the company is affected when they are killed, which was done very effectively. In a real way, it demonstrates the emotional connection these men had to each other.”

For these actors, being in “Band of Brothers” was a pivotal moment in their careers. Knowing what was at stake, they banded together as a group in much the same way as the soldiers in Easy Company during World War II. They forged lasting relationships with others in the cast that remain intact today.

“There’s not a day that goes by that I don’t have some form of communication with one of the other actors,” Madio says. “We have reunions and we talk to each other all the time. We are all brothers and friends.”

All three actors plan to attend the 25th Anniversary Symposium in New Orleans. Their goal is to renew their bonds while honoring the real men who helped liberate Europe from fascism more than 80 years ago. They also look forward to engaging with fans of the miniseries — especially new viewers who weren’t even born when it first aired 25 years ago.

“I’m stopped today by 16-year-olds in the airport who recognize me,” McCall says. “We’re speaking to the generation we need to speak to now. They need to realize what these men did for us.”

The “Band of Brothers” 25th Anniversary Symposium will be shown live online Friday and Saturday, July 31 and Aug. 1. The public can watch free by registering here.

When the COVID-19 vaccine was released in 2020, Daniel Pendergast was intrigued.

“I honestly thought it sounded kind of ingenious at first,” he said.

But then he learned there was a very small chance of heart inflammation that could occur after vaccination in healthy men like himself: around eight cases per million, according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. For Pendergast, 44, whose family has a history of heart disease, even that low risk felt too high. He decided against taking the shot.

That was a problem for Pendergast. As a master sergeant in the Air National Guard, he was required to follow Pentagon orders mandating vaccination.

Ultimately, he decided to forgo vaccination and leave the military once his contract was up in June 2022. It was a hard decision. He had been in the military for 16 years, served in the Honor Guard, and sang the national anthem at sporting events.

“Lots of tears were shed over it,” he said. “It’s not something that I ever wanted to do.”

Now after four years as a civilian, Pendergast hopes to rejoin the military under a January 2025 executive order signed by President Donald Trump in his first month back in office. It promised to reinstate all service members who were discharged, or voluntarily left, for refusing the COVID vaccine. Not only does Pendergast want to continue to serve until his active duty retirement or beyond, but, he said, “I feel that we’re needed back in the force because we are the ones who held our integrity.”

The path to reinstatement hasn’t been easy. Pendergast submitted for reinstatement less than a week after Trump’s executive order. But that was almost a year and a half ago, and Pendergast still hasn’t put his uniform back on. Recently, the Board of Correction for Military Records offered him reinstatement and recommended he return to Active Guard Reserve status—though there’s no guarantee the Guard will honor that recommendation. He still hasn’t been offered a new contract.

Pendergast isn’t alone. The War Horse spoke with four military service members also vying for reinstatement after rejecting the COVID vaccine, and all complained about having to wade through bureaucratic red tape for months, despite being told by the White House they would be prioritized.

“A lot of people that are in the Pentagon or on the board, they didn’t live the abuse and the coercion that we did,” said Jordan Karr, a former Air Force intelligence officer who was involuntarily separated in 2022 for refusing the COVID vaccine. “We just want fairness.”

Thousands left the military during the COVID mandate

Nearly 8,000 active-duty and reserve troops were involuntarily separated after refusing to get the COVID vaccine, according to the Department of Defense. Of those, more than 4,000 did not receive honorable discharges. Many others, Pendergast included, left voluntarily when their contracts ended rather than take the shot. Just days before the January 2021 deadline, roughly 40,000 service members still hadn’t complied with the vaccine mandate, according to The Washington Post.

The effects of the vaccine mandate are still felt years later.

“I still have clients that are leaving today,” said Davis Younts, a lawyer and former Air Force judge advocate representing service members discharged after refusing the COVID vaccine. Younts said he represented three Navy SEALs who left as soon as their contracts were up.

“They spent two years on the sidelines, not able to train, not able to do anything, given horrible jobs,” he said.

Younts himself left the Air Force Reserve when his contract ended in 2022, opting to refuse the vaccine for religious reasons. He claims that vaccine deniers in the military generally fall into two camps: those opposed for religious reasons, and those who, like Pendergast, worried about the vaccine being experimental (according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, COVID vaccines were rigorously tested before receiving an emergency use authorization).

When Congress rescinded the military’s vaccine mandate in 2023, it should have been welcome news for the thousands of service members who had refused the shot. But only about 200 troops and 85 coast guardsmen have been reinstated so far, although nearly 900 have had their discharges upgraded. More than 800 of those discharged have expressed interest in returning to service, according to the Pentagon.

Since Trump’s return to office, the administration has made a concerted effort to win back more COVID vaccine deniers. Aside from the president’s executive order, which promised former service members a return to their prior rank and “full back pay,” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth in early May created a COVID-19 Reinstatement and Reconciliation Task Force.

“We must continue to ensure there is a clear path for these service members to return to service,” Hegseth wrote in a memo announcing the initiative. “We will continue to make this right.”

Waiting months for reinstatement

Karr, the former Air Force intelligence officer, shared Pendergrast’s concerns about the COVID vaccine. She worried it could affect her ability to get pregnant, though the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says there is currently no scientific evidence that COVID vaccines cause fertility problems. Karr asked for a medical exemption for a fertility disorder, but was denied. So she declined the vaccine and was involuntarily separated in 2022 with an honorable discharge. She also joined a lawsuit against the military, which was later dismissed.

Now she’s ready to rejoin, albeit this time in the reserves, since she now has a young infant. Karr submitted for reinstatement before Trump was inaugurated and was offered reinstatement 10 months later, but she has not yet accepted since she felt the terms were unfair.

“One of the things a lot of us have contention with is that we’re being offered to come back in the same position, which is actually a career negative for us,” Karr said.

Accepting the reinstatement offer meant she’d be four years behind peers who were vaccinated.

“People that sit behind a desk don’t understand the hardships that a lot of members went through,” she said. The Board of Correction for Military Records is still considering her appeal.

A former coast guardsman, who spoke on condition of anonymity out of fear speaking to the media might jeopardize their chances of reinstatement, said that after their vaccine refusal, the Coast Guard threatened a court-martial and nonjudicial punishment before settling on restricted leave, and eventually, an honorable discharge.

A year later, the Coast Guard came calling.

“I asked them, what were they offering?” said the guardsman, who declined their first offer as inadequate. “When you are being forced to get out, and a brand-new recruit is more incentivized to join than it is for you to be reinstated, it’s like a huge slap in the face.”

But after four years out of uniform, reinstatement is more appealing, though a lack of trust persists. The guardsman has been waiting about five months to rejoin the military.

“There’s still no accountability,” the service member said. “So the question is, if there’s nothing that says this won’t happen again, how do I know upon reinstatement that they won’t ruin my career again?”

A former Air Force service member, who also asked not to be named, said they have spent more than a year trying to return to the military. But the reinstatement process laid out by the Department of Defense and individual military branches seems to change by the day.

“It’s really been an onus on us to reach out, to pursue and advocate very heavily for ourselves,” the airman said.

Still, Hegseth’s COVID task force seems to be helping, they said. According to the airman, the officer in charge of the task force “is sincerely interested in fixing systemic issues with the current reinforcement process.” They have spoken several times about sticking points in the current process and brainstormed possible workarounds, the service member said.

Karr agrees. She thinks that Pentagon bureaucrats, rather than top leaders like Hegseth, have held up her case.

“He doesn’t have to keep putting out these messages saying that they want us back, but he’s doing it,” she said. “So I do believe that his heart is good.”

Back pay and missing bonuses

After Pendergast left the military in 2022, he was suddenly jobless for the first time in a decade. He took a job at a TSA help desk. Leaving the military came with a $34,000 pay cut.

“There were some lean years,” he said.

Daniel Pendergast had to quickly find a new job after leaving the military due to refusing the COVID vaccine (photo courtesy of Daniel Pendergast)

Some of the service members who spoke to The War Horse said they depleted their savings to stay afloat or relied on their spouses’ incomes.

So perhaps it’s no surprise the announcement of back pay in Trump’s executive order sparked excitement and controversy. But there was some fine print: Service members who are reinstated are subject to “offsets” that deduct any money made from civilian jobs or self-employment after their discharge, as well as payments from the Department of Veterans Affairs. It’s become a major deterrent for some people considering reinstatement.

“There are many military members who have side jobs, secondary jobs, second sources of income while they’re active duty, and none of that gets deducted from your paycheck,” said the former coast guardsman. The offsets, they said, are “something outdated that needs to be revised.”

The former airman described offsets as “a heck of a reality slap.” For people going through the full reinstatement process, some were “making zero money back for back pay,” they said.

Reinstated service members are also excluded from Trump’s tax-free “warrior dividend” of $1,776 paid to nearly 1.5 million troops last year, The War Horse has learned, despite language in the executive order saying reinstated troops receive their “full back pay, benefits, bonus payments, or compensation.”

When asked about delays in the reinstatement process and missing bonuses, Pentagon officials declined to answer The War Horse’s questions. Instead, they sent a July 14 statement from Anthony Tata, undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness.

“The Department is fully committed to restoring honor and rebuilding trust with the warfighters impacted by the COVID-19 vaccine mandate,” the statement said, pointing to two recently released memos announcing a review into how the military planned and carried out the vaccine mandate between January 2020 and January 2023, and a directive to declassify that review. The review is expected to be made public by February 2027.

The military quietly releases a COVID vaccine study

At the same time the Trump administration is working hard to regain the trust of service members who didn’t get the vaccine, the Military Health System, which is operated by the Department of Defense, quietly released one of its largest reports to date about the safety of the COVID vaccine. The March 9 report, which was requested by Congress, found that service members who were vaccinated had a short-term risk of heart disease compared to those who were unvaccinated—though it was less than the heart disease risk of troops that were infected with the COVID virus.

The findings, according to Peter Chin-Hong, a professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, who specializes in treating infectious diseases, are “similar to other studies where you know the risk is really in a short window period, and the risk is concentrated amongst young males in particular, and it’s not sustained.”

The study also found that some health conditions, such as acute kidney failure and hemorrhagic stroke, were less likely after service members were vaccinated. Those at risk for most of the health conditions studied were service members who contracted COVID and were not vaccinated, researchers said. In other words, the military study found the COVID vaccine protected most people from severe health conditions.

That wasn’t a surprise for Chin-Hong.

“Getting the real deal virus is much more detrimental to the body in multiple organs than the vaccine itself,” he said, noting that the virus and the vaccine activate the immune system in different ways.

When asked about the study, Pendergast said he hadn’t seen it and didn’t expect it to change his view.

“It doesn’t change the calculus for me,” he said. “This sounds a little bit like CYA.”

So why spend more than a year trying to rejoin the military whose explanation he doesn’t trust?

“We’re getting in either to restore our careers,” he said, “or a good percentage of us are getting in to try and restore the force itself.”

The intent — a stronger, more capable force — is a good one. Policies built on good intentions, however, can still go wrong, and this one deserves careful scrutiny before it is implemented at scale.

The goal of having a more effective military is understandable, but the question remains whether the science supports the strategy.

Testosterone replacement therapy is an important treatment for men with true hypogonadism, a carefully diagnosed medical condition. But expanding hormone screening across hundreds of thousands of healthy service members represents a significant shift in military medicine — one that deserves far more public discussion than it has received.

The military has always embraced innovation, but medicine is different. Good intentions are not enough. Before introducing any intervention on a broad scale, policymakers should be confident that the benefits outweigh the risks for the entire force.

So, does the evidence actually show testosterone makes troops more lethal or better fighters? Not clearly.

The Army’s own research is instructive. In the service’s first Optimizing Performance for Soldiers study, men given weekly testosterone injections during a simulated combat energy deficit preserved more lean muscle than men on placebo, but their physical performance declined at about the same rate as the untreated group.

The hormone helped the body hold onto muscle, but did not translate into better fighting performance. Put simply: the case that testosterone will make service members deadlier hasn’t been made.

It’s also worth considering what a low testosterone reading often actually represents. A low laboratory value may reflect the normal physiological demands of military service rather than a chronic hormonal disorder.

Sleep deprivation, combat deployments, chronic stress, obesity, alcohol use and intensive physical training can all temporarily suppress testosterone levels. Low testosterone is often a symptom rather than the underlying problem.

If the Department of Defense wants to build a stronger military, investments in sleep, nutrition, physical conditioning, behavioral health and recovery science are likely to produce broader and more lasting benefits than widespread hormone replacement.

Without careful evaluation, including repeat testing and assessment for reversible causes, many healthy service members could be labeled as testosterone deficient and begin long-term treatment they may never have needed. That decision carries consequences.

Once testosterone therapy begins, the body’s own production is suppressed. Fertility may decline. Testicular atrophy can occur. Some men become dependent on continued treatment because normal hormone production does not fully recover.

Ongoing monitoring is required to watch for elevated red blood cell counts, prostate-related concerns, sleep apnea and other potential complications. Researchers continue to study the long-term cardiovascular effects, particularly in younger, healthier populations.

Behavioral effects deserve equal attention. Testosterone influences mood, confidence, motivation and aggression. When appropriately prescribed, these effects may improve quality of life in men with genuine deficiency. But unnecessary treatment, or excessive hormone levels, may increase irritability, impulsivity, emotional volatility or impaired judgment in susceptible individuals.

In a military that depends on discipline, restraint and sound decision-making under extreme pressure, even uncommon adverse effects warrant careful consideration.

Testosterone therapy has an important place in modern medicine. That is indisputable. The key issue, though, is whether routine screening and expanded hormone treatment across one of America’s healthiest working populations will strengthen military readiness or create long-term health challenges that outweigh the expected benefits.

Many of these issues will need to be addressed by the Department of Veterans Affairs after the service member transitions to civilian life.

America’s military superiority has never depended on a laboratory value. It is built on leadership, training, discipline, resilience and the judgment of the men and women who serve. Those remain the greatest sources of our strategic advantage.

David Shulkin, MD, was secretary of the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs during the first Trump Administration and served as VA’s under secretary of health during the Obama Administration.

The hard truth is this: America cannot dominate the modern battlefield if the Department of War does not know where its critical materials, components and software come from.

A fighter jet, missile battery, naval vessel, radar system, drone or armored vehicle does not begin on the factory floor of a prime contractor. It begins with minerals, metals, magnets, chips, chemicals, software, castings and forgings — thousands of components moving through supply chains that stretch across the world. In a major defense program, those chains may run five or six tiers deep, while government visibility often stops at the first or second.

That gap is the danger. America’s vulnerabilities are buried in the lower tiers — the subcontractors and vendors supplying specialty metals, electronics, chemicals, software and raw materials that Washington is not watching.

And that is exactly where President Trump’s new executive order, “Securing America’s Defense Supply Chains and Ensuring Domestic Acquisition of Critical Materials,” strikes.

For too long, Washington has pretended a weapons system is “American” if final assembly happens in America — even when critical inputs come from foreign adversaries or suppliers vulnerable to foreign ownership, control or influence. That fiction may satisfy a lobbyist. It will not survive a war.

Congress recognized the danger in 10 U.S.C. 4872, which restricts acquiring covered materials from covered nations. But laws are only as strong as their enforcement — and waiver culture, contractor convenience, and bureaucratic inertia have hollowed out those rules.

That era is over. The Trump policy is simple and tough: end the loose waiver process, expose hidden supply chains, vet the lower tiers, qualify trusted sources and hold contractors accountable.

Beginning January 1, 2027, waivers under 10 U.S.C. 4872(c)(1) and (e) will no longer be business as usual. A contractor seeking relief must identify the noncompliant source, document exhaustive efforts to find compliant material or prove none was available, lay out the steps to remove it from the supply chain and commit to a strict timeline.

Failure to qualify a domestic source will not count as “non-availability” unless the contractor shows active, adequately funded and ongoing efforts to qualify one. In plain English: No more, “We tried nothing, and we’re out of options.”

To expose hidden supply chains, the order directs the Secretary of War to begin rulemaking requiring contractors to map critical supply chains for national-security acquisitions identified by the department — from raw materials to the end products delivered to the military — through a tier-by-tier bill of materials tracing components, parts, software and materials back to their origins.

This is not paperwork. It is battlefield preparation. If a missile system depends on a foreign-controlled supplier, the Department of War needs to know before the shooting starts. If a naval platform relies on a sole-source supplier vulnerable to bankruptcy, takeover, cyber disruption or production bottlenecks, that risk must be surfaced and mitigated. If a supply chain runs through an adversary-controlled chokepoint, that is a strategic exposure, not an accounting detail.

To vet the lower tiers, contractors must screen suppliers and subcontractors supporting critical supply chains for financial risk; foreign ownership, control or influence; and manufacturing and supply risk. They must report significant risks and fix them on a strict, tracked timeline.

On trusted sources, the message is blunt: qualify or replace. For decades, contractors have hidden behind slow qualification processes while adversary-linked suppliers stayed embedded in America’s defense industrial base. No more.

Contractors relying on supply chains that include materials or components supplied by unreliable foreign suppliers must promptly qualify and use alternatives, consistent with law, safety, mission requirements and contract terms. The Department of War will speed the testing and qualification of new sources and materials. And when outdated regulations block rapid qualification for defense production, those roadblocks must come down.

On the accountability front, national security contracting is not a game of hide-the-ball. Contractors that fail to qualify required alternatives can lose task orders, contract options or the contract itself. And contractors who commit fraud, deliberately mislead the government, or knowingly or willfully fail to implement approved mitigation plans face every lawful action and contractual remedy the secretary deems appropriate, with possible referral to the Attorney General.

The broader message of this new Trump administration EO should be clear. America’s arsenal of democracy begins in the mine, the refinery, the forge, the foundry, the chemical plant, the semiconductor fab and the machine shop.

Peace through strength requires strength through secure supply chains: American weapons built with domestic, allied, and trusted materials; sunlight, enforcement, qualification and accountability.

And one overriding rule for every defense contractor: Never put an American warfighter at risk because an adversary-linked supplier was buried five tiers down.

Peter Navarro is the White House Senior Counselor for Trade and Manufacturing.

The base, which houses the Naval Postgraduate School, the Naval Research Lab and Fleet Numerical Meteorology and Oceanography Center, received a DGX GB300 computer — billed as the highest-performing AI processing system available for enterprises — under a cooperative research and development agreement between NPS and AI giant NVIDIA that began in December 2024.

A ribbon-cutting ceremony to launch the new system took place Wednesday afternoon with NVIDIA founder and CEO Jensen Huang and the commander of U.S. Pacific Command, Adm. Samuel Paparo in attendance.

Installed at NPS and within the school’s network, the machine will provide “a substantial increase in computational capacity to the NPS.edu network while operating within the existing power and water infrastructure of the school,” Navy officials said in a release.

The makeup of the supercomputer — which combines 36 NVIDIA Grace CPUs with 72 NVIDIA Blackwell Ultra GPUs, according to officials — enables it “to process large volumes of work in parallel rather than just sequentially,” according to the release. “This architecture is particularly well suited for large AI applications, where speed and scale are essential. It enables students and faculty to train models, analyze data, and explore complex problems that were previously out of reach.”

Capt. Michael Owen, NPS’s vice provost for warfare studies and leader of the school’s AI Task Force, said in an interview with Military Times that he sees plenty of military applications for the new machine’s computing power.

“You can think of of massive logistics-scale challenges of, how would you distribute beans, bullets and all of the standard defense logistics things — supply chain management challenges,” he said. “It could be … cybersecurity models to be able to be better positioned to understand where there are potential threats in network traffic.”

The Navy’s work — unique within the Department of Defense — in meteorology and oceanography will benefit from a computer able to create models at smaller and smaller resolutions, Owen added.

“You can get better predictability for very localized operations, as opposed to more like, 50-kilometer grids,” he said. “When you start talking about defense operations, your general weather modeling that you would see at your evening weather news or in the morning for your commute, is just not adequate. [The supercomputer] really unlocks whole new methods of, how do I even think about modeling the weather or the climate, or how do I think about solving these problems.”

While the Defense Department has its own Defense Supercomputing Resource Center, maintained by the Army Corps of Engineers in Vicksburg, Mississippi, that center is maintained for operational use, Owen said.

“What’s unique and different about NPS is that we are research and innovation-focused,” he said. “It’s not just, here’s my model — I need to run it just to operate … we are going to be focused on, how do we change the models? How do we improve the models?”

The CRADA and installment of the supercomputer started with an expressed interest from Huang, Owen said, to partner with the school and “help make NPS one of the premier AI institutions in the world, and definitely the premier U.S. defense institution or school for artificial intelligence.”

NPS announced last December that it was launching a new master’s program in artificial intelligence to provide troops from around the joint force and in allied militaries with tools to lead AI integration into warfighting. Its first cohort is underway with 11 students.

According to officials, the new supercomputer will be available to NPS students and faculty, though staff plan to “carefully manage demand,” particularly at the outset.

“While utilization is expected to grow steadily over time, the true value of this capability is not measured in compute hours alone,” officials said in the release. “It is measured by how quickly NPS students and researchers can transform data into actionable knowledge, accelerate discovery, and develop solutions to pressing operational challenges.”

The increased budget, up from the $900.6 billion authorized last year, raised concerns among lawmakers who felt they should cease funding the war in Iran, especially as the U.S. faces mounting debt.

The House passed its fiscal 2027 National Defense Authorization Act in a vote of 216-212, with three representatives sustaining from voting. A large majority of Republicans, 209, voted in favor of the bill, and 205 Democrats voted against it. Seven Republicans and six Democrats strayed from party lines.

The bill would have the Department of Defense officially adopt a name change to Department of War. The massive bill also includes a 5% to 7% pay raise for military service members, an increase in active-duty force size and a mandate to revert the names of nine southern military bases to those recommended in 2023 to replace Confederate honorifics.

In the Wednesday session, House lawmakers took to the floor to debate the bill, with some alleging its necessity to safeguard America both domestically and abroad. Policymakers on either sides of the aisle placed the blame on the other.

“The Democrats have gone on time and time again with this unprecedented obstruction,” House Budget Committee Chairman Rep. Jodey Arrington, R-Texas, said in the session. “Recently, they blocked the National Defense Authorization Act to protest President Trump and our troops’ efforts to stop this radical terrorist regime from having nuclear weapons,” Arrington said, referring to Senate Democrats blocking that chamber’s version of the 2027 NDAA last week.

Other lawmakers said the bill’s high price tag would cost American taxpayers too much during a time when citizens are already struggling, and as the country is in the midst of a widely unpopular war in Iran.

“Most of that [new deficit] spending is for President Trump’s Iran war, a reckless decision with absolutely no plan on how to achieve victory and how it would end,” House Budget Committee Ranking Member Rep. Brendan Boyle, D-Pa., said during the session.

“There’s nothing in [the reconciliation bill] whatsoever to bring down costs,” Boyle continued. “Just more spending on the most unpopular war in American history.”

The Iran war has cost the Defense Department $37.5 billion to date, Secretary Pete Hegseth told senators Tuesday. Hegseth testified during a hearing to request $67.1 billion in supplemental money for the war and other DoD expenses.

Historically seen by both parties as “must-pass legislation,” the NDAA is one of the few major bills that always gets through Congress, having become law for 65 straight years.

This year’s bill faces major challenges, given deep partisan divisions within Congress on issues ranging from the massive size of the military budget, to the Iran war and aid to Israel and Ukraine.

It is early in the NDAA process.

Each year, ⁠the House and Senate pass their own versions of the NDAA, before ​Armed Services committee negotiators agree on compromise version that then comes up for a vote in each chamber.

If the compromise version passes, it would be sent ​to the White House for Trump to sign into law or veto.

Reuters contributed to this report.

In a report released Tuesday, Government Accountability Office analysts said that although the VA outlays for the Community Care Program have risen from $9.5 billion in 2020 to $25 billion in 2025, the amount of improper payments have been reduced each year, from 78% of the total in 2020 to 2.4% in 2025.

The GAO said improper payments occur when the VA reimburses contractors that manage community care for outdated claims, incorrect reimbursement rates or payment amounts or bills that exceed authorized care.

Sometimes, the improper payments may be related to fraud, the GAO added, noting that as recently as February 2026, a home health care company submitted fraudulent claims for community care for $100,000 in services that were never provided. In another case, a provider agreed to pay $3.7 million to resolve charges that it fraudulently billed the VA for services that were not medically necessary.

The VA has worked to reduce improper payments and fraud risks, the GAO noted, by developing and implementing processes for identifying problems and assessing the root causes of improper payments.

The department developed and implemented corrective actions to address the issues, the analysts said.

The VA has not, however, conducted a fraud-risk assessment that identifies inherent risks, assesses the likelihood of fraud and determines its risk tolerance. GAO auditors recommended the VA create a fraud-risk framework and implement it.

“While VA has taken steps to identify and assess fraud risks, these efforts do not meet the key elements of a fraud risk assessment and have not resulted in a comprehensive fraud risk assessment for the program, leaving it vulnerable to fraud,” the report stated.

VA officials told the GAO that they were able to reduce improper payments in Community Care because they addressed the “broader system and policy issues,” such as payment processing errors and eligibility problems that followed the development of the nationwide program established in 2018 by the Mission Act.

VA officials said they would further address any issues that may contribute to improper payments in the next round of contracts for Community Care, which are expected to be awarded this year.

VA officials concurred with the GAO’s recommendation to create a fraud-risk framework, saying the department would establish oversight during its ongoing reorganization of the Veterans Health Administration, with the effort to be completed by March 2028.

The GAO also looked at improper payments by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to companies that manage Medicare Advantage plans. Analysts found that in 2025, CMS paid roughly $23.7 billion in improper payments, up from $16.3 billion in 2020.

The Navy recently published a Sources Sought notice for a massive, multi-award contract — worth up to $30 billion — for the multi-mission dry dock.

The dock is part of the Navy’s Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program, which aims to modernize the service’s four long-neglected shipyards at Portsmouth, Virginia, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, and Kittery, Maine, as well as the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard & Intermediate Maintenance Facility. The contract is for five years plus three one-year options.

“The Multi-Mission Dry Dock is a fully pressure-relieved dry dock capable of accommodating shipyard repair services for the newest Ford-class aircraft carrier, Nimitz-class carriers, and other surface and subsurface ships served by PSNS & IMF,” according to the Sources Sought notice.

The project was spurred by the need to service Ford-class carriers on the West Coast.

“The Navy does not currently have the capacity and capability to perform depot-level maintenance on a Gerald R. Ford-class carrier in the Pacific Northwest,” according to the Navy’s Multi-Mission Dry Dock website.

The capability to even service older carriers is limited at Puget Sound: “The only dry dock on the West Coast able to accommodate a current Nimitz-class aircraft carrier is Dry Dock 6 (DD6), which does not meet seismic resiliency standards and cannot fully accommodate Ford-class carriers,” the site reads.

The multiple-award construction contract, or MACC, includes several task orders that typically range between $2 billion and $6 billion each. However, there may be smaller task orders for early contractor involvement and alternative technical concepts.

“The focus of this MACC will be the construction of a new proposed Multi-Mission Dry Dock at PSNS & IMF, located at Naval Base Kitsap (NBK) Bremerton, Washington,” the Sources Sought notice said. Located within the existing Dry Dock 3 and Piers 6 and 7, the project includes “dry dock drainage, dewatering, and flooding systems; a caisson; roadways and rail networks; portal crane track; access and egress elements; mechanical, electrical, and communications systems; support buildings; and utility routing tunnels. The proposed project also includes demolition of facilities and utilities.”

The Navy expects the first task order to include dredging, as well as work on piers, buildings and utilities. The second task order will see demolition of Dry Dock 3 and construction of the multi-mission dry dock. Task order three will provide infrastructure, such as electrical substations, utility tunnels and building crane rails. Task order four will be for the dock caisson.

Puget Sound has been a fixture for the Navy for more than a century.

It began in 1891, when the Navy bought 190 acres for $10,000 (about $367,000 today) to create Naval Station Puget Sound. The station became a shipyard in 1900 and was the Navy’s only West Coast repair facility until 1941.

“Between 1917 and 1969, Puget Sound Naval Shipyard constructed a total of 85 ships, including the largest vessels on the West Coast,” the Navy said.

The department will transition from the current Automated Neuropsychological Assessment Metrics, or ANAM, to an “improved capability” through a phased implementation effective immediately, according to a June 9 Pentagon memorandum.

A Pentagon official told Military Times that the effort will replace legacy tools with a next-generation, enterprise-wide capability that can detect cognitive changes early.

The new capability will provide timely, actionable data that can allow commanders to make informed operational decisions, while empowering medical providers to analyze cognitive trends for rapid clinical follow up and the department to sustain the overall readiness of the U.S. military, the official said.

“While ANAM provided an early foundation for cognitive baseline collection, the operational requirements, and technological landscape have advanced significantly,” the memo reads.

“The Department’s sustained research investments, combined with emerging clinical insights and the evolution of neurocognitive and neurobiological assessment capabilities, now support a transition from ANAM to a more modern, scalable, and operationally aligned solution,” the memo continues.

The memo first circulated on the unofficial Air Force Facebook page Air Force amn/nco/snco last week. A Pentagon official confirmed its authenticity to Military Times on Wednesday.

The rise of ANAM

ANAM is a computerized test that takes around 20 to 30 minutes with a combination of reaction and memorization activities to evaluate a service member’s neurocognitive baseline and can evaluate for traumatic brain injuries, or TBIs.

The tool was first developed in 1984, and it was mandated by Congress in 2008 for all Defense Department personnel as a pre-deployment baseline testing and post-injury assessment. At the time, the number of TBIs in the military grew substantially following deployments to the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts.

TBI is the disruption of brain function or structure caused by an external force, like a blow to the head or shockwave from a blast, that can cause brain bleeds or swelling. Symptoms can range from dizziness and trouble sleeping to memory loss or seizures.

While most cases are mild and allow service members affected to return to duty rather quickly, the more severe cases can last years or be permanent.

More than 500,000 service members sustained a TBI from 2000 to 2025, according to government data, from day-to-day activities, military deployment or training. The majority of TBI cases suffered by service members are classified as mild, or concussion, and they can return to full duty within 10 to 14 days of sustaining the injury.

Service officials have considered TBI to be the “signature injury” of modern warfare as it was seen widely in post-9/11 conflicts due to an increase in the use of explosive devices.

More recently, in the Iran war, nearly 500 service members have been injured, with the majority of injuries being TBIs.

A new approach

The June memo, signed by Under Secretary of War for Personnel and Readiness Anthony Tata, says that the DoD is granting a one-year exception to the previous policy to allow for the phased implementation to replace ANAM as the Pentagon’s cognitive monitoring tool.

When indicated, the new tool will incrementally replace ANAM for cognitive baselining, periodic monitoring, pre-deployment screening, clinical evaluations and post-deployment assessment, per the memo.

“The Department’s commitment to brain health is unwavering and enduring,” Tata wrote in the memo. “This modernization ensures that our cognitive monitoring enterprise reflects evolving science, operational needs, and our responsibility to protect those who defend our great nation.”

During the phased implementation, ANAM will continue to be used to meet the department’s cognitive monitoring requirements until the new capability is tested across the military.

Firstly, the rollout will prioritize deployed service members, followed by those preparing to deploy, the Pentagon official said, and will reach all remaining service members eventually. The memo also states that high-risk civilian personnel will be included in the early implementation.

TBI interventions

The change continues the broader efforts across the DoD to strengthen early identification and management of brain-health impacts for the total force. Services have been fielding new capabilities to assess TBI on the battlefield.

The Defense Health Agency’s Warfighter Readiness, Performance and Brain Health team hosted a medical training camp recently to evaluate TBI assessment technology prototypes being developed for use, according to a mid-July release.

Last week, the Army announced that a handheld blood-testing device, called i-STAT Alinity — which can detect TBI in 15 minutes — is being fielded to units under the 10th Army Air and Missile Defense Command because of the disproportionately high rates of TBIs in air defense.

The move to update the Defense Department’s cognitive monitoring program comes as funding for medical research into TBI has dropped significantly in the last three fiscal years.

In fiscal 2024, TBI under the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs was allocated $175 million, which dropped completely the following fiscal year to zero.

Funding jumped to $40.5 million in fiscal 2026, still a 23% decrease from fiscal 2024, with fiscal 2027’s budget request maintaining that amount.

The 31st MEU, made up of approximately 2,200 service members, arrived at White Beach Naval Facility, Okinawa, Japan, after a six-month deployment to the U.S. 5th Fleet and 7th Fleet areas of operations. There, the ARG-MEU helped to enforce a U.S. Navy blockade along the Strait of Hormuz.

“The team adapted, never lost sight of the mission, and performed flawlessly under the most dynamic circumstances,” U.S. Marine Corps Col. Chris Niedziocha, commanding officer of the 31st MEU, said in a statement.

The Tripoli ARG includes America-class amphibious assault ship USS Tripoli, San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock ship USS New Orleans and Whidbey Island-class dock landing ship USS Rushmore.

The Tripoli ARG and 31st MEU deployed from the Tripoli’s homeport in Sasebo, Japan, in early March and arrived in the U.S. Central Command area of operations on March 27.

Prior to participating in Operation Epic Fury, the ARG-MEU participated in Exercise Iron Fist 26 alongside Japanese Self-Defense Forces.

Sailors and Marines helped transport 800,000 pounds of cargo, conducted more than 1,600 hours of combat aviation missions without an accident and refueled more than 300 aircraft ashore and underway.

During the first Navy blockade, which began April 13 and ended June 18, U.S. military forces redirected over 140 compliant ships and disabled nine non-compliant ships.

The blockade ended briefly after the U.S. and Iran signed a 60-day interim Memorandum of Understanding to pause military operations as peace talks were underway, but the U.S. renewed the blockade on July 14 after a ceasefire between both sides failed.

The legislation seeks to end a decades-old offset that forces many combat-injured medically retired veterans to forfeit a portion of their retirement pay for every dollar they receive in VA disability compensation. Supporters have long argued the policy amounts to penalizing service members for injuries sustained in combat, calling it a “Wounded Veteran Tax.”

Then Congress introduced a revised version of the legislation in March 2025.

When the Congressional Budget Office evaluated H.R. 2102, the current version of the Major Richard Star Act, its new cost estimate projected the bill would increase direct spending to $78.1 billion over 10 years, roughly $68 billion more than CBO’s estimate for the bill’s 2023 predecessor.

The revised estimate transformed the conversation surrounding one of Congress’ most broadly supported veterans bills and prompted a question that still remains unresolved:

What changed between the 2023 and 2025 versions of the Richard Star Act to increase the projected cost so dramatically?

The answer isn’t simply a larger number. It lies at the intersection of legislative drafting, statutory interpretation, DoD actuarial data and congressional budget scoring, where even subtle changes can reshape both the projected cost of legislation and its political future.

Two provisions with a $65 billion price tag

CBO’s explanation points to two provisions it concluded were added to H.R. 2102 that were not included in H.R. 1282.

The first would make Chapter 61 military retirees with fewer than 20 years of service eligible for Concurrent Retired and Disability Pay (CRDP), a benefit generally limited under current law to military retirees who completed at least 20 years of service. CBO estimated that provision alone would increase direct spending by approximately $63 billion over the 2026–2036 period.

The second provision would remove an existing cap on CRDP payments for Chapter 61 retirees with at least 20 years of service, adding another estimated $2 billion.

Together, CBO concluded those two provisions accounted for roughly $65 billion of the increase between the previous and current versions of the legislation.

For years, supporters understood the Richard Star Act as legislation intended to restore concurrent receipt for approximately 54,000 combat-injured Chapter 61 retirees whose military retired pay is reduced because they also receive VA disability compensation.

Its estimated cost, roughly $10 billion over a decade, was substantial but comparatively modest within the context of major veterans legislation. Then the revised estimate changed the conversation.

A different understanding of the revisions

Congressional staffers in Sen. Blumenthal’s office involved in developing both H.R. 1282 and H.R. 2102 understood the revisions differently than CBO ultimately interpreted them, explaining that the legislative revisions were intended to address a narrow gap affecting approximately 1,124 combat-injured Chapter 61 retirees who remained excluded under previous versions of the bill. Under that understanding, the intended affected population would increase from roughly 54,000 to about 56,000 veterans.

CBO reached a different conclusion.

Its estimate states that approximately 255,000 Chapter 61 retirees with fewer than 20 years of service would become eligible for concurrent receipt under H.R. 2102. That broader interpretation accounts for nearly the entire increase between the previous estimate and the March 2025 score.

CBO has reaffirmed its estimate, explaining that it evaluated the statutory changes contained in H.R. 2102 using population data provided by the Department of Defense’s Office of the Actuary, which identified the class of retirees CBO concluded would become newly eligible under the legislation.

The result is a striking disconnect between Congress’ stated intent and CBO’s interpretation of the revised bill. Military Times also asked the Department of Defense about its role in providing information used during CBO’s analysis. DoD did not respond by publication.

The stakes

For the combat-injured retirees who have spent years advocating for the Richard Star Act, the legislation has never been about budget estimates. It has been about restoring military retired pay they argue they earned through their service and sacrifice. But in Congress, budget scores influence legislative prospects.

CBO has explained how it arrived at its estimate. What remains unclear is why congressional offices involved in drafting the revisions believed the legislation would affect roughly 56,000 combat-injured retirees while CBO concluded the revised language would extend eligibility to a much broader population.

That difference transformed a bill long understood to carry a price tag of about $10 billion into legislation projected to cost $78.1 billion over a decade, fundamentally altering its prospects in Congress.

Before her death in 2024, in an interview with Wounded Warrior Project, Tonya Star, widow of Maj. Richard Star, reflected on what passage of the legislation would mean to the veterans and families it was designed to help:

“It’s not just a rubber stamp; this will affect their day-to-day life and help them provide for their families… This would be their win.”

The ceremony, known as a “dignified transfer” of the bodies, comes amid growing frustration with the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran.

The war has cost U.S. taxpayers at least $37.5 billion, has led to the deaths of 18 U.S. service members and injured more than 450 troops. It has killed thousands of Iranians.

Both Republican and Democratic lawmakers have raised questions about the war, which has boosted global oil prices and shows no signs of ending. Since the war started in February, President Donald Trump has offered differing objectives for the war.

The president traveled to Dover Air Force Base in Delaware for the ceremony.

“We’re going to honor them. For me it’s one of the hardest things to do as a president. But it has to be done,” Trump said before leaving for the ceremony. Asked what he would tell the families of the fallen, Trump said: “All I’m going to say is, we love you. We love your child, and that’s what they are to them. They’re their children. There’s no games, no nothing.”

U.S. presidents, vice presidents and dignitaries regularly attend the solemn transfer ceremonies at Dover — home of the largest U.S. military mortuary — during times of war or conflict.

The three U.S. service members killed when an Iranian missile hit their sleeping barracks at Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan on Friday were 1st Lt. Tyler James Feehan, 25, Sgt. Angel S. Rampersad, 28, and Pvt. Isabella Gonzales, 19. All three were assigned to U.S. Army air defense brigades.

The fourth death, of Sgt. Michael Emmanuel Swinton, 30, occurred on Sunday in a separate incident in Erbil, Iraq, during a controlled detonation of an attack drone.

The Pentagon said on Monday that 100 service members have been injured since July 7 and 96% have returned to duty.

Four in five Americans expect ‌the war to drag on for an extended period, according to a Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll conducted this month. Some 37% of respondents approved of U.S. military strikes against Iran.

Yet every year, just as many of our most experienced aviators are ready to lead squadrons, mentor younger pilots and shoulder greater responsibility, too many choose to leave active duty. That should concern every American because this is no longer simply about pilot retention. It is about preserving one of our nation’s greatest strategic advantages.

As a former U.S. Navy helicopter pilot, the wife of a retired Navy fighter pilot who proudly served for two decades, and the representative of Virginia’s Second District, home to Naval Air Station Oceana and the East Coast’s Master Jet Base, I know this community well. I know what it takes to earn Wings of Gold, the sacrifices military families willingly make, and the extraordinary demands our nation places on those who defend it.

Most fighter pilots don’t leave because they’ve stopped believing in the mission. Too often, they leave because, by the halfway point of a career, years of deployments, relentless operational tempo, missed birthdays and anniversaries, family separation and uncertainty about the future have taken a cumulative toll. They still want to serve. Our challenge is ensuring that a full career in uniform remains a path they can realistically choose.

There is no single reason fighter pilots leave active duty. Compensation matters. So do family stability, aging infrastructure, quality of life and competitive civilian opportunities. Looking at any one of those issues in isolation misses the point. Together, they determine whether an experienced aviator believes the Navy can remain not only a calling, but a career.

The consequences extend far beyond an empty cockpit. Every experienced fighter pilot who leaves takes with them years of judgment, tactical expertise, leadership and operational knowledge that cannot be recreated overnight. Some would become instructors. Others would become department heads, commanding officers, air wing leaders and the mentors responsible for preparing the next generation. We don’t just lose another pilot, we lose the leaders who would have developed the pilots behind them.

That is why fighter pilot retention is no longer simply a military personnel issue. It is a strategic imperative.

For nearly four years, I have warned that readiness begins long before an aircraft leaves the runway. That is why I have fought for investments at Naval Air Station Oceana, from replacing aging fuel infrastructure to improving quality of life for service members and their families.

Those efforts were never simply about fixing facilities. They were about strengthening military readiness. We cannot expect America’s best fighter pilots to dedicate decades to defending this nation while overlooking the conditions in which they live, work and raise their families.

The good news is that our military is moving in the right direction.

Under President Donald Trump and Secretary Pete Hegseth, our armed forces have renewed their focus on the warrior ethos, readiness and winning wars. Combined with the extraordinary work of Navy recruiters across the country, the Navy has exceeded its recruiting goals after several difficult recruiting years. That success proves something important: When America focuses on the right priorities, we can solve hard problems.

Now we must do the same for retention.

Recruiting and retention are different challenges. Recruiting brings exceptional young Americans into uniform. Retention ensures they remain long enough to become the experienced leaders our military depends on.

We cannot recruit our way out of a retention problem.

Recognizing the urgency of this challenge, I fought to include a provision in the House version of the fiscal 2027 National Defense Authorization Act requiring the Navy to conduct a comprehensive assessment of fighter pilot retention. That assessment is an important first step because we need an honest understanding of why we are losing experienced aviators and where we must improve.

But that assessment cannot become the end of the conversation. It must become the beginning.

We already know many of the pressures our aviators face. We know there is no single solution. Bonuses matter, but they are not enough. Infrastructure matters. Family stability matters. Operational tempo matters. Career flexibility matters. Quality of life matters. None of these challenges exists in a vacuum, and none will be solved in isolation. If we are serious about retaining experienced fighter pilots, we have to be just as serious about rethinking how we support them throughout an entire career.

That will require creativity. It will require challenging assumptions that have existed for decades. It will require Congress, the Department of Defense, Navy leadership, military communities and the American people to recognize that retaining experience is every bit as important as recruiting talent. The same determination that helped reverse the recruiting crisis must now be applied to preserving the experience that makes our military the finest fighting force in the world.

America’s competitors understand that our military advantage is measured by more than the number of aircraft on the flight line. It is measured by the experience, judgment and leadership of the men and women who fly them. That experience takes years to build, but it can be lost one retirement, one resignation and one difficult career decision at a time.

We know what is at stake. Now we must come together, with urgency, creativity, and resolve, to ensure that America’s best fighter pilots can continue doing what they have always wanted to do: serve their country.

Because America cannot surge experience.

Rep. Jen Kiggans, R-Va., is a U.S. congresswoman representing Virginia’s second district. She served for 10 years as a U.S. Navy helicopter pilot.