WATCH: Padilla Confronts Trump OMB Director About Cost of Iran War, Rising Prices for Families

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, U.S. Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), a member of the Senate Budget Committee, questioned Russell Vought, Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), about President Trump's Fiscal Year 2027 proposed budget and its eye-popping 42% increase in defense spending. Padilla highlighted the absurdity of the unprecedented proposal, particularly at a moment when Vought and this Administration refuse to tell the American people how much the unauthorized, unconstitutional war in Iran is costing taxpayers on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis.

"The public has seen this proposal for what it is. It is not a significant investment in health care. It is not a significant investment in housing. It is not a significant investment in energy assistance. It is not a significant investment in disaster preparedness. It is not a significant investment in job training," said Senator Padilla. "It is a huge spike in defense spending."

Padilla further hammered Vought on why he didn't take the opportunity during his testimony in the House yesterday to encourage House Republicans to pass the Senate's unanimous legislation to fund all elements of the Department of Homeland Security except for ICE and Border Patrol.

Earlier this month, Padilla released a statement on President Trump's FY 2027 budget proposal, calling on Congress to reject it and "fight for one that reflects our values, not the whims of Donald Trump."

Video of Padilla's full questioning is available here.

A full transcript of Padilla's questioning is below.

Full transcript:

PADILLA: Mr. Vought, several of us have recognized the $1.5 trillion increase in proposed spending for the Department of Defense. When that number first came out-that proposed budget first came out-to recognize a 42% increase, it didn't just raise eyebrows, I think it raised alarm bells for a lot of people. Not going to, at this moment, get into a debate of defense spending versus non-defense spending and the historical balance we've tried to maintain, but just that 42% increase, $1.5 trillion, seems like a whole lot of money for someone who has a track record of talking about fiscal responsibility and concern about the deficit. As I've tracked, not just your testimony in the House yesterday but through public reporting, I understand you've tried to justify it by [saying] "it's meant for significant paradigm shifting investment." I think you used that language earlier today in this hearing, and that "for the industrial base to double and triple capabilities and build more facilities, cost has to be booked in the first year." Is that still accurate? Then logic would tell me that if we are booking these costs in the first year, then we should anticipate significant reductions in your proposed budgets and needs in the next fiscal year and the fiscal year after that. Is that what we should anticipate for future budgets?

VOUGHT: This is viewed as one-time increase of this level. I don't expect all of the defense levels into the future to be at this level.

PADILLA: So we would be able to count on significant reductions in your proposed budget next year and the year after that?

VOUGHT: I'm saying that we have not built that into the budget and it was meant to be a one-time, seize-the-moment, pay for what we can [to] ensure that we have people that are driving the best deals possible at the Department of War - what kind of deals can they secure if they have the money there. That's where this was. I'm not going to speak to next year's budget process other than to say that's been our intent.

PADILLA: For somebody who really claims to pay attention a lot to dollars and cents, it sounds like very vague and unconclusive. Speaking of your testimony in front of the House yesterday, did you take the opportunity to urge House members, particularly House Republicans, to pass the bill that's been passed twice unanimously by the Senate to fund TSA, pay those employees, to fund FEMA, pay those employees, fund the Coast Guard, pay those employees, fund CISA, pay those employees? Yes or no?

VOUGHT: Senator, you all shut the government down, the whole government down, and then you shut DHS down for a month.

PADILLA: The Senate has passed this bill twice on a unanimous basis.

VOUGHT: After a month, after a shutdown.

PADILLA: Did you take the opportunity to encourage the House to pass it, yes or no?

VOUGHT: Senator, of all those lines - yes, I would encourage the House to pass it - but all of those TSA lines are as a result of Senate Democrats' shutdown of the Department of Homeland Security. I think the American people need to know that.

PADILLA: It's not a Democratic shutdown, it's a House Republican shutdown. We have a pathway forward and you had a golden opportunity yesterday and you didn't take it.

Now, moving forward. As my colleagues have recognized, and every time we talk about the annual proposed budget, we talk about it being a statement of our values and our priorities. The public has seen this proposal for what it is. It is not a significant investment in health care. It is not a significant investment in housing. It is not a significant investment in energy assistance. It is not a significant investment in disaster preparedness. It is not a significant investment in job training.

It is a huge spike in defense spending. Now, some people, they're trying to give us the benefit of the doubt, said "well, whether we like it or not, because we know it's not authorized, but there's this war in Iran that the President has dragged us into." Maybe that would justify the big increase in spending, yet you refuse to give specific numbers. You refused yesterday in front of the House and you're refusing here today to provide specific costs as to what this war is costing us on a

daily, weekly, or monthly basis and going.

We'd expect so much more from the head of OMB. It sounds like, it seems like you're not taking this job seriously to stay on top of the dollars, let alone this being a complete abandonment of a promise that the Administration supposedly made to the American people to bring down costs. The cost of housing is still high. The cost of groceries is growing. The price at the pump that people are paying is still continuing to spike because of this unauthorized war. That's not a question, that's just my conclusion.

I do have one more question, though. When you were coming through for confirmation, several of us here raised questions and concerns about your prior statements-[an] objective you seem to have had to put federal employees into trauma. You remember those statements. You guys got off to a great start. Between DOGE experiments last year, funding freezes, layoffs, pushing people to retirement, the relocation of agencies - making it harder for people who wanted to stay working in departments and agencies that they love - the elimination of certain departments. There's 350,000 fewer federal employees today, and those that remain, a good chunk of them are worried whether they may be next. What grade do you give yourself in successfully putting federal employees into trauma?

VOUGHT: I reject the premise of your question other than to say I'll going to let the President of the United States grade my performance.

PADILLA: If the President asked you what grade you would give yourself, what would you say?

VOUGHT: I'm going to let the President of the United States grade my performance, Senator. Thank you.

PADILLA: We're going to grade this performance in November real quick. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

###