Pentagon removes all independent weapons testing reports, drawing congressional criticism over oversight

Congressional leaders are demanding answers from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth after the independent office tasked with reviewing new military programs and weapons pulled all public reports from its website.

"One of the most important functions of (the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation) is to provide transparency about the safety and effectiveness of major weapon systems," wrote Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Rep. Donald Norcross (D-NJ) in a letter this month.

Warren is the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Personnel, and Norcross is the ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee's Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee.

"A key element of this function is the release of publicly available annual reports that detail findings by DOT&E to make sure critical deficiencies are fixed so service members are not harmed or killed," they added.

Legal Obligations and Access Restrictions

Despite legal obligations to publish the annual reports it sends to Congress online, the office now requires a Defense Department-issued common access card to access the collection, which includes material that has been available to the public for years.

A Defense Department official told Federal News Network that the decision to remove the materials was based on concerns that foreign adversaries could use artificial intelligence tools to develop detailed profiles of the U.S. military's vulnerabilities.

Criticism and Oversight Concerns

Critics of the decision say the reasoning is part of an ongoing effort to reduce oversight and accountability as Defense Department officials set records for spending and budget requests.

Last May, Hegseth issued a memo directing the DOT&E to significantly reduce its workforce and budget in the name of cost-savings. In turn, the office's staff was cut by some 74% and its budget by nearly 80%. The Defense Department subsequently proposed a $1.5 trillion budget for 2027.

In an interview with Military Times, Gabe Murphy, a policy analyst with Taxpayers for Common Sense (TCS), called it "suspicious" that officials gutted the DOT&E office prior to proposing a massive spending increase.

The Golden Dome Missile Defense System

Murphy pointed to the ambitious Golden Dome Missile Defense System as an example of a project that warrants more oversight.

"They know that missile defense in general — and I think in particular, the space-based interceptors they want for this program — are not going to perform well in real tests," he added.

President Donald Trump listens to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth speak about the Golden Dome missile defense shield. (Jim Watson via Getty Images)

To those pitching and building the project, the trillion-dollar Golden Dome is described as a missile defense system capable of detecting, tracking and intercepting aerial threats before reaching American soil.

But to critics like Murphy, it's "questionable strategically and questionable in terms of their affordability."

In a TCS report, the organization argued against the project because of concerns of scale and price. The group argued that while Golden Dome is modeled after Israel's "Iron Dome," which is designed for short- and medium-range missiles, the U.S. model would have to adjust for scale and threat, which would significantly increase costs.

Cost Estimates and Effectiveness

While Defense Department officials say the estimated cost for the Golden Dome will be about $175 billion within the next three years, others say it could be anywhere from $1.2 trillion to $4.4 trillion over the next two decades.

As for the project's effectiveness, the TCS report said the technology is unproven and that the available evidence suggests it will not work as proposed — but without live-fire testing and analysis by the independent office, such assessments remain uncertain.