Congress Sets Guardrails for Pentagon Acquisition Reforms

House and Senate lawmakers say they’re on board with the Pentagon’s latest plan to reform the way it buys new systems, but in a report accompanying the latest draft of fiscal 2026 defense spending bill, they urged more investment in the defense acquisition workforce and expressed skepticism about the Defense Department’s call for more budget flexibility.  

“While speed of delivery is critical, the agreement cautions that speed must be factored alongside cost, performance, lethality, and scalability,” lawmakers stated in the Jan. 20 report. “Rapid delivery of ineffective weapon systems at exorbitant cost will not serve the warfighter well. The agreement also notes the importance of a capable acquisition workforce and ensuring stable, annual funding for programs are integral components of successful acquisition reform.” 

In November, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth rolled out an expansive acquisition reform agenda that would eliminate cumbersome requirements processes, make program management teams more flexible and accountable, and prioritize speed as a key performance metric. The strategy calls for the military services to adopt a commercial-first acquisition mindset and directs programs to develop “multi-track” procurement approaches where multiple vendors remain on contract until an initial production decision is made. 

While lawmakers largely support the Pentagon’s approach, they raised concerns in three areas: acquisition workforce gaps; risks associated with requirements reform; and what they view as the department’s “premature” request for more budget flexibility.

Lawmakers noted that the outcome of DOD’s plan will depend, in part, on the strength of its acquisition workforce, which was disproportionately impacted by federal workforce cuts last year.

“The success of defense acquisition reform will be dependent on the experience and talent management of the acquisition corps, including contracting officers, financial managers, and engineers,” the report states. “The agreement is concerned that recent reductions to the acquisition workforce, the effects of which have yet to be realized, will negatively affect the Department of Defense’s ability to achieve the initial speed and ability sought by this reform effort.”

The report directs the department to craft an acquisition workforce strategy that outlines workforce investments needed to achieve its acquisition reform goals, including an estimate of how many additional billets will be needed within each agency, office, and military service. The strategy should also consider training needs, policy changes, and funding requirements over the next five years. 

On requirements reform, lawmakers stated that they agree with the need for major changes but want more details on how the department plans to address the risks that come with introducing new processes. In particular, lawmakers are concerned the Pentagon may favor service-specific acquisition programs over joint ones and that organic, “bottom-up” innovation could be stifled.

Along those lines, the report directs the Pentagon to brief House and Senate defense appropriations subcommittees on those risks within the next two months. It also requires the Comptroller General to assess the performance of the department’s new requirements process over the next year and report back to the subcommittees. 

“The report shall compare at least three examples of joint requirements approved through the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System to three examples of joint requirements approved through the reformed process,” the report states. “This comparison will include an assessment of the process steps, decision points, responsible organizations, time lines within each step, and effectiveness of the legacy and reformed processes.”

Lawmakers also weighed in on a central element of Hegseth’s acquisition reforms—moving away from siloed program management to a portfolio acquisition approach. The Pentagon’s strategy requires the services to name portfolio acquisition executives who are empowered to shift resources and adjust requirements based on real-time mission needs. 

To fully implement this approach, the Defense Department would need to restructure its budget—collapsing program lines into mission-focused portfolios—and seek approval from Congress to give portfolio managers, or PAEs, the ability to reprogram funding.

Lawmakers said they like the PAE approach but are hesitant to approve a new appropriations structure that provides more authority to acquisition officials when they aren’t convinced DOD is effectively executing its current authorities. The report specifically calls out the Pentagon’s reprogramming requests, which the department is required to submit when it needs to move money between programs. That documentation, lawmakers said, often lacks the required details and justification, which delays the approval process. 

“Consideration of legislative changes to the appropriations structure is premature until the department has demonstrated full and effective use of its existing flexibilities and addressed persistent internal delays,” the report states. “As such, the agreement strongly discourages changes to the current appropriations structure in the fiscal year 2027 President’s budget request.”