HASC Objectives and Actions

 "This legislation is a major overhaul of the defense acquisition system, addressing long-standing problems that have resulted in billions of dollars in cost overruns and years of schedule delays." 

"The Panel on Defense Acquisition Reform's work on metrics is vital—poor measurement hides waste that risks our forces."  

“We need metrics that tell us not just what we’re spending, but what we’re getting. Without clear performance measures, we’re flying blind on programs costing billions.” 

"We cannot afford a costly and ineffective acquisition system,"

 "The current system is unsustainable."

"DoD still largely follows a slow and costly acquisition process hamstrung by a focus on the process and rigid requirements rather than fielding a capability and achieving results.

Large programs of record for complex systems or large services contracts are built around onerous requirements or meaningless metrics rather than problem-solving ideas or desired outcomes."

 1. “We have wasted a spectacular amount of money on weapons systems that either  haven’t worked at all or who have not lived up to their promise. The failure we wind up tolerating is failure on a massive freaking scale. Think F-35.”           2. “I want to stop throwing money down that particular rathole.”       

  “Second, is process over results.”   “Part of it is also having a freaking product that works at the end of the day.”              

Skelton's provisions in the NDAA for FY 2011 (Sections 864 a, b, and c) require DoD to: 

• Review acquisition guidance, including DoD Instruction 5000.02, to “consider whether measures of quality and technical performance should be included in any EVM system. 

• Submit a report to the Armed Services Committees.  

NDAA for FY 2026 includes two reforms proposed in letter to them, Subj: NDAA for FY 2026 Fails to Meet Your Common Objectives, 7/18/25. Excerpt:  "my recommendations to eliminate barriers to entry and to institutionalize digital engineering are in the current legislation."