Pat Fallon

Rep. Fallon Leads 2A Letter to Secretary Driscoll

Position: Rep. Fallon urges the Department of the Army to finalize and implement a rule allowing law-abiding citizens to carry firearms on U.S. Army Corps of Engineers lands in accordance with state laws, arguing this aligns federal policy with Second Amendment protections.

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- This week, Rep. Pat Fallon (TX-04) led a letter to Secretary Driscoll requesting that the Department of the Army immediately finalize and implement a rule allowing law-abiding citizens to carry firearms on land managed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) in accordance with state laws. As reported by the Daily Caller, Rep. Fallon commented: "Public lands form a complicated patchwork of jurisdictions with invisible boundaries that Americans cross every day. While the National Park Service and Bureau of Land Management respect our Second Amendment rights, USACE lands remain an outdated exception. Finalizing this long-proposed rule is critical to align with state law and restore full constitutional protections on USACE lakes, trails, and campsites. American citizens deserve to exercise their God-given Second Amendment rights without arbitrary federal restrictions." This letter was signed by 23 additional members and was supported by Gun Owners of America and the National Rifle Association.

Rep. Fallon Leads Letter Asking that CVDs on Fertilizer be Reconsidered

Position: Rep. Fallon opposes countervailing duties on phosphate fertilizer from Morocco, arguing they increase costs for American farmers and harm agricultural productivity.

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- This week, Rep. Pat Fallon (TX-04) led a letter urging the U.S. International Trade Commission to reconsider the implemented countervailing duty on phosphate fertilizer from Morocco. Rep. Fallon was joined on this letter by 31 other representatives. As reported in The Washington Reporter, Rep. Fallon commented: “The US International Trade Commission should immediately reconsider the countervailing duties, put in place by the Biden Admin, on phosphate fertilizer from Morocco. Our corn, soybean, and wheat growers depend on affordable fertilizer to grow healthy, high-yielding crops, but these duties have cost American farmers billions since being implemented in 2021. This burdensome policy hurts the very individuals who feed our nation. It is time we put our farmers first and get this reversed.” Supporting organizations include National Corn Growers Association, American Soybean Association, USA Rice, Texas Corn Producers, & Texas Farm Bureau.

Implementing a U.S. Cyber Force: A Conversation with Rep. Pat Fallon

Position: Rep. Fallon advocates for establishing a dedicated U.S. Cyber Force as the seventh branch of the armed forces, arguing that the military has fallen behind adversaries in cyber capabilities and that a unified service structure is necessary to adequately defend national interests.

Good morning everyone, and thank you for allowing me to talk to you all about the United States Cyber Force, an institution that I and others are working so hard to establish as the seventh branch of the armed forces. I want to be clear from the start – The U.S. military has fallen behind our adversaries in our cyber capabilities, and the remedy is clear…we, as a country, cannot adequately defend our national interests without a Cyber Force. Not only is it a necessity, but a dedicated service for the cyber domain is inevitable. I’ll say it again, Cyber Force is inevitable. Whether we are successful this year, next year, or the following, there will be a Cyber Force. Back in 2017, nearly a decade ago, my good friend and the Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, Mike Rogers stood on this exact stage and explained clearly to the audience that a dedicated Space Corps (as he coined it) is coming. He laid out the factors that shaped his thinking: Fast forward to today…not only was he successful in establishing the Space Force, but more so, his judgement that a Space Force was necessary for the good of the nation has been overwhelmingly endorsed in Congress, the White House, and the Pentagon. Just a few weeks ago at the State of the Union, you heard President Trump commend the Space Force and the foresight required to know how valuable it has become. The President and Mike Rogers were right, and their detractors who made exaggerated and false claims about how a military service for Space were categorically proven wrong. As a former Air Force officer myself, all of the arguments for a Space Force resonated with me. Why? Because each and every reason parallels the reasons why we have an Air Force today. Through the 1920s and 30s, the Army consistently failed in its management of military aviation. The Army downplayed, diminished, and discounted the revolutionary potential of air warfare. If these factors led to an Air Force, you’d think that the Air Force’s leaders would be wiser than to recycle those mistakes in their management of the Space Domain. However, I learned a long time ago: never underestimate the military’s capacity to repeat its errors. For more than 20 years, the War Department has formally recognized five warfighting domains: Land, Air, Sea, Space, and Cyberspace. Today, we have military services aligned to four out of these five. For the life of me, I can’t understand why anyone would say that having the Army to focus on land warfare and the Air Force to focus on air combat is sensible, but having a Cyber Force is a bridge too far. Not only is a Cyber Force sensible, but it makes even more sense when you consider the dramatic failure of the Department's fragmented approach for the last 15 years in distributing responsibility for generating forces and capability across the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps. By the Department’s own acknowledgement, the military cyber ecosystem is not meeting the mark on training forces, developing mastery in the domain, or in growing the force to match the threat. What is so striking is that these are the exact same issues we were facing in 2022, as we were in 2017, as we were in 2012. While we have failed to address these systemic issues after more than a decade and a half, our adversaries are seizing the moment–not only expanding their capabilities, but dramatically growing their forces. Before my life in politics, I built and grew businesses. Let’s say I had a friend come to me seeking an investment in his company. He tells me, “we’ve been around for 15 years. While our product doesn’t scale and we haven’t turned a profit, things are going great.” Fair to assume that I’m not pulling out my checkbook for him. I noted earlier how cyberspace has been officially recognized by the War Department as a warfighting domain since 2004. You’d naturally believe that over the last 20+ years, we’d have developed an entire generation of uniformed cyber leaders who could serve as 2-, 3-, and 4-star officers. If I’m raising the issue today, you’re right in assuming that isn’t the case. Of the 13x general and flag officers assigned Cyber Command, there is only a single 1-star general with a cyber background. When the CYBERCOM Commander looks at the 4x Service Cyber Components, none are led by general or flag officers with cyber experience. If we were talking about Strategic Command, there’d rightfully be an uproar if the 4-star commander lacked any relevant experience with nuclear weapons. Similarly, if the Commander at Indo-Pacific Command or the Command’s Director of Operations had never been to Asia, Americans should be absolutely terrified. And yet, that’s precisely what we treat as normal for the cyber domain. This may sound abstract, but let me phrase it another way. I could have the best accountant in the world, but if I need surgery, I’m not asking him to get into the operating room just because he’s good at doing my taxes. As I look at the military’s cyber ecosystem, I see all the factors that Mike Rogers saw in 2017 when he looked at the space landscape: There is one glaring difference between today’s cyber problems and the historical issues with the space domain and the air domain before that. Whereas the issues in space and aviation stemmed from mismanagement by one military service, the issues in the cyber domain are found across Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps. In this way, today’s cyber problems are compounded and even more evident. Six months ago, CSIS launched its Commission on Cyber Force Generation to bring together true experts in military cyber operations and think through what a future Cyber Force looks like. I know that they are deep into that, and am excited about what comes from that; however, as impressive as that group may be, it’s not what I think to be the most convincing evidence that change is necessary and on the horizon. I had the chance to review a collection of uniformed and civilian cyber operators’ anonymized testimonials, and “jarring” doesn’t begin to describe my reaction. These were accounts from more than 90 professionals from every service, every rank from E-7 to 1-star and senior executives. What was clear and incredibly depressing was how little confidence the people that do this work everyday have in our ability to fight at scale. I read about critical deficiencies in training, planning, leadership, operations, management, and technical capabilities. Every single account reached the exact same conclusion that a Cyber Force was necessary, but for widely varying reasons. Our service members are pleading for help, and now it’s time for Congress to step up. Of course, that’s easier said than done. I’m in my third term in Congress, and I’ve seen a fairly predictable pattern in how Congress tries tackling problems: I won’t stomach uniformed and civilian leaders inventing excuses and wasting years delaying the inevitable. We should count ourselves as fortunate– rarely is the solution so obvious and achievable. After 78 years, no one looks back at the decision to establish the Air Force and says, “We’ve made a terrible mistake.” With now 6 years of history, I don’t believe anyone looks at the Space Force and thinks that either. In fact, it’s the opposite…I think the overwhelming majority look at both the Air Force and Space Force, and think, “Why didn’t we do this sooner?” If we’ve established that the current structure is not working, and that the solutions applied in the past have a proven history of success, it is quite obvious where that leaves us. There will be a Cyber Force. It's a question of when. Like President Trump, I’m not a big fan of slow walking when it comes to national security. We’re going to get this done, and when we look back, everyone is going to be glad we did. Thank you for having me here, and appreciate the time.

Rep. Fallon Statement in response to President Trump's 2026 State of the Union Address

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Rep. Pat Fallon (TX-04) responds to President Trump's State of the Union Address last night: "In his State of the Union Address, President Trump rightly made the case for how his America First agenda is firing on all fronts to better the lives of our nation’s citizens,” commented Rep. Pat Fallon. “In the past year alone under his leadership, rampant inflation is down to 2.4 percent from its Biden era 9 percent peak, crime is at its lowest in 125 years, and zero illegal aliens have been admitted into the US. These are real facts and figures that are driving the economy and keeping America’s streets safe.” “On the world stage, President Trump’s time-tested modicum of ‘peace through strength’ has restored deterrence towards our adversaries. Our military is strong, and our men and women in uniform once again have a Commander in Chief who has their back. Our hemisphere is secure, and we have demonstrated the supreme capabilities of our armed forces when it comes to advancing US interests and security abroad.” “Last night was a turning point in history, and we are incredibly fortunate to have a President who truly loves our country and the values it was founded upon. As the United States celebrates its 250th birthday this year, we can rest assured that America’s best days are yet ahead.”

Rep. Pat Fallon's MERICA Act Passes the House

Washington, D.C. -- The House of Representatives voted this evening to pass the Mineral Extraction for Renewable Industry and Critical Applications Act, the "MERICA Act," introduced by Congressman Pat Fallon (TX-04). “Proud to see the House vote in favor of the passage of the MERICA Act this evening, a bill that I introduced in order to break our reliance on China for rare earth minerals and instead open up federal lands for their extraction here at home,” commented Rep. Pat Fallon. “H.R. 3872, better known as the MERICA Act, would amend the Mineral Leasing Act for Acquired Lands (MLAAL) by adding hardrock minerals as part of the listed deposits subject to leasing under MLAAL so that all federally acquired lands can be considered for hardrock mineral leasing. As things currently stand, we have valuable lithium deposits locked up on federal lands, and we cannot access nor utilize them under current law. In fact, much of Texas’ Fourth Congressional District falls within what is known as the Smackover Formation, a geological formation that encompasses areas from eastern Texas to the Florida panhandle. A recent U.S. Geological Survey-led study estimates there to exist 5 to 19 million tons of lithium reserves in this mineral-rich deposit.” “Strong, secure rare earth mineral supply chains and stockpiles are a US national security priority as we seek to deter Chinese aggression in the Indo-Pacific. There is no reason why we should not look to our own domestic reserves to make decoupling from the CCP a reality. The MERICA Act is an excellent opportunity to do so, and I urge the Senate to advance this key piece of legislation.”

Rep. Fallon in Fox News: What Can a Former KGB Agent Teach Us About What’s in Store for America?

Originally published November 10, 2025 in Fox News Digital We have already seen many articles and interviews from the American right (and no doubt will in the foreseeable future) that bemoan the likely downward spiral New York City will face with the election of proud communist Zohran Mamdani. History tells us their predictions will almost certainly be correct, but this response won’t address the root problem concerning the rise of Marxism in the United States, something that has been in the making for decades. The path forward will require Americans to understand and contend with the influence of Marxist indoctrination at a societal scale. In a 1984 interview, Soviet defector Yuri Bezmenov, a former KGB agent, spoke openly and plainly about the threat posed by Communist efforts to undermine the institutions, social fabric and values of the United States through means of ideological subversion. "It’s a great brainwashing process which goes very slow, and it’s divided into four basic stages, the first one being demoralization," stated Bezmenov. In America today, we are past that first stage, having entered the second, that of "destabilization," as the Soviet defector put it. What Bezmenov alluded to amounts to the full-scale ideological capture that has been waged in recent decades on our country’s institutions: the courts, Congress, academia, certain organized labor and so on. For example, the folks who didn’t support Mamdani were typically folks without multiple degrees who are working-class. They were everyday New Yorkers who were better insulated from the left’s attempts at subversion. Mamdani’s backers were in fact the "highly educated," the affluent and the transplants who think they know best how to run a Potemkin village. His victory in New York City is but the latest example of the prevalence of left-wing radicalism throughout consequential institutions in our society.Sound familiar? Lenin’s "useful idiots" are the catalyst for the ideological subversion of America. This is why the left in American politics today has become so radical. They have not been educated; they have been indoctrinated and have become beholden to seemingly benign or altruistic progressive values, but which, when carried out to their logical ends, are designed to divide and destroy. The powers that be within today’s Democratic Party have in fact come to personify these "useful idiots." Of course, the modern Democratic National Committee is no longer the party of President John F. Kennedy. Consider, that a communist will be the next mayor of the Big Apple. It writes like bad, lazy fiction. The priorities of the Democratic Party are in fact jeopardizing U.S. national security, creating fiscal unsustainability, fostering division, and, in turn, sowing chaos. This is precisely the point — the amorphous and sometimes vague nature of these issues conceals the true goal of left-wing subversion, which is to seize power. In nearly every case, the "cause" is not really the "cause"; it is simply window dressing for the destructive and ultimately deadly ideology of communism. The decades-long campaign of agitation on a host of discordant issues, also reflected in the equally discordant coalitions that make up the Democratic Party’s presumable base, has been aimed at demoralizing and distracting American society to a point where it cannot respond effectively to the left’s takeover. Those familiar with how the left operates will no doubt be familiar with this "long march through the institutions." They have laid the groundwork for the destabilization of our institutions by spreading propaganda and an ideology that cloaks its true intent — to seize power. Why does that matter? It means our adversaries, just as the Soviet Union intended, destabilize our country and ultimately normalize this strain of communism smack-dab into the American mainstream. For all of the presumed wariness of adversarial foreign influence, the past half-century of ideological capture is proof that it yields results. The American right would do well to heed these warnings lest it lose the recently consolidated momentum it has fought so hard for in recent years. The American experiment in self-government is in jeopardy. Our governmental institutions and the rule of law are at risk as Americans lose faith in both. President Donald Trump has recognized this from day one, reflected in his unabashed propensity for exposing the radical left in the public square for all to see. At the very least, patriotic Americans of all stripes should look into the groups driving the assault so as to deprive the radicals of their infrastructural and organizational support. This means following the money and continuing to reclaim the narrative. Listen to Bezmenov’s interview and hear what’s at stake from the KGB itself. After all, our American values and institutions of government can only stand so long as we actively defend them. The left will, of course, condemn anything of this nature as neo-McCarthyism, but with their playbook so clear, what else can we expect? Rep. Pat Fallon represents Texas’ Fourth Congressional District. He is a member of the House Armed Services, Oversight, and Intelligence Committees.

Comply or Collapse: Why President Trump’s Golden Dome for America Depends on Securing Operational Technology

Position: The release advocates for prioritizing cybersecurity of operational technology (OT) systems within the Department of War, particularly for the Golden Dome missile defense system, arguing that zero-trust cybersecurity frameworks are essential to protect critical military infrastructure from adversarial cyberattacks.

Published October 30 in DefenseScoop The U.S. military is the most sophisticated fighting force in modern history. However, that doesn’t mean there have not been moments of unforced failure or unexpected setbacks. The surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, the Chinese intervention in Korea, and the fall of Kabul as recently as 2021: all of these episodes were driven by a failure to account for the capabilities, technologies, and cunning of an adversary. With the threat of near-peer conflict at its highest since the end of the Cold War, President Donald Trump’s Golden Dome missile defense system is critical to protecting our homeland and deterring broader conflict. In an age where U.S. national security depends on more than just a nuclear arsenal but on timely, accurate access to information made possible by dominance in the cyber and space domains, it’s no question that Operational Technology (OT) systems are a warfighting imperative across every aspect of Golden Dome. To defend against such rapidly evolving threats, including countermeasures against unmanned aerial systems, we must leverage zero-trust principles to protect OT systems, the digital networks, and automated devices that control defense-critical systems. The tools exist today to build a robust zero-trust framework for Golden Dome and its components. Therefore, what’s the problem? Our nation is confronting adversaries with virtual capabilities to inflict significant harm on all citizens through cyberattacks on OT systems in water, power, communications, positioning, and other critical infrastructure we rely on for survival. While many across the Department of War (DOW) leadership view securing OT as a serious issue, weapon system and program management offices treat cybersecurity requirements as unfunded mandates outside key performance parameters, with few accountability mechanisms in place. History provides examples of the danger of not securing OT. Recall that Sandworm (Russian hackers) carried out cyberattacks on the Ukrainian grid before invading the Crimean Peninsula in 2014. The reality of our strategic vulnerability is that the OT supporting Golden Dome’s installations, sensors, and weapons must be digitally secure to prevent physical disruption or sabotage. The same cyber threats persist for DOW’s weapon systems and supporting assets, which remain largely unaccounted for, unsegmented, and exposed to adversaries like the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), who have affirmed their intent to disrupt or sabotage our military operations, logistics, and communications. This problem has metastasized over many decades because these systems were not designed with modern cybersecurity threats in mind. While the DOW’s business systems are prime targets for espionage, our depot and shipyard automated systems, airfield fuel distribution systems, and water and power systems each represent an operational strategic attack vector. Where the Cold War required us to harden our physical infrastructure to achieve force protection, today’s equivalent is enforcing zero trust and other cybersecurity performance factors for Golden Dome. The Secretary of War, working with U.S. Northern Command, the Space Force, and the Missile Defense Agency, must prioritize defending Golden Dome’s OT systems, as they’re integral to mission assurance. Golden Dome planners must prioritize funding to create and sustain cyber protections, as well as leadership accountability for timely results. Step one is a well-crafted, integrated policy framework that mandates zero-trust principles as a backbone for Golden Dome. This policy must ensure that we discover, validate, microsegment, and continuously monitor every digitally enabled asset that interacts with the system, whether it is IT or OT. It needs to be embedded in the cybersecurity statement of work and included as a go/no-go evaluation criterion in the statements of need for every component, leveraging the Comply-to-Connect program. This policy must also outline a deployment timeline consistent with the system’s initial and full operational capabilities. Step two involves expressly budgeting for the zero-trust principles and ensuring that funding protections are mandatory system requirements; anything less dooms the effort to failure. Step three means following through: Sustaining zero-trust and other cyber protections throughout the life cycle of Golden Dome must be elevated to a mission-critical status, with command-level visibility and defined performance metrics tied to readiness assessments. Operational commanders must be empowered and held accountable for cyber readiness, rather than merely passing a Cyber Operational Readiness Assessment (CORA) audit to maintain access to the Department of Defense Information Network (DODIN). Given our understanding of the threats facing Golden Dome, failing to accomplish these three steps will jeopardize mission success. Cyber vulnerability is not an IT problem; it’s an operational challenge for commanders. Understanding this new “art of war” and its implications for the national security assets under their charge is crucial for every commander. The bottom line is that this is a question of finite resources, of priority and will. DOW leadership and Congress must ensure that an unambiguous policy is in place for securing this system of systems, leveraging the success of the Comply-to-Connect program. Next, allocate and protect the funds needed to adapt, deploy, and sustain zero-trust security for the core system and its components as they come online. Finally, make this a commander’s issue: demand urgency, demand visibility, hold teams accountable, and integrate cyber into all aspects of operations and readiness. Tomorrow’s conflicts will demand a dynamic approach that allows the U.S. military to account for all adversarial assets, not only on land, sea, and air, but in the cyber and space domains as well. Rep. Pat Fallon represents Texas’ Fourth Congressional District. He is a member of the House Armed Services, Oversight, and Intelligence Committees.

Rep. Pat Fallon Leads Letter Calling for Investigation Into Biden Intel Cover-Up

Washington, D.C. -- Today, Rep. Pat Fallon (TX-04) led a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel calling for an investigation into the intelligence cover-up of a December 2015 report that raised concerns over then-Vice President Joe Biden's corrupt family influence ties to Ukraine. "For more than a decade, Democrats have weaponized the intelligence community (IC) and administrative state to advance their own partisan agenda, shield themselves from scrutiny, and work to delegitimize their political opponents," commented Rep. Pat Fallon. "What a recently declassified CIA report revealed was that both Biden and his staff intentionally ordered the suppression of key US intelligence findings that signaled concern over the Biden family's corrupt business dealings in Ukraine." "The American public is no stranger to the Biden family influence-peddling scheme, culminating in President Biden's slew of pardons in the waning hours of his administration. The officials who took part in this cover-up must be held accountable. Moving forward, it is critical that we take steps to ensure that our IC is never again exploited for partisan gain and that it returns its focus to analyzing and preventing potential threats to our homeland. President Trump has already made the depoliticization of our IC a priority in his second term, evidenced by Director of National Intelligence Gabbard and CIA Director Ratcliffe's focus on restoring legitimacy and mission focus within the IC." Rep. Pat Fallon was joined on this letter by 20 of his House Republican colleagues: Rep. Michelle Fischbach (MN-07) Rep. Randy Weber (TX-14) Rep. Claudia Tenney (NY-24) Rep. Paul Gosar (AZ-09) Rep. Keith Self (TX-03) Rep. Mary Miller (IL-15) Rep. John Rose (TN-06) Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (FL-13) Rep. Michael Cloud (TX-27)

Spending Alone Won’t Deter Chinese Aggression

Position: The author argues that deterring Chinese military aggression requires more than increased defense spending alone; it demands a whole-of-government approach, allied cooperation, modernization of the defense industrial base, and investment in advanced technologies including AI and drone systems.

Originally published in The Washington Times. We hear often that, in order to bolster the credibility of U.S. deterrence against China’s aggression in the Pacific, we must urgently get to work restoring America’s defense industrial base. Absent from the discussion du jour is that maintaining deterrence toward China — that is, holding Beijing’s military aggression in check — will require more than getting factory assembly lines up and running again, as we did during World War II and the Cold War. In fact, it will require a whole-of-government approach as well as enhanced cooperation and integration between the U.S. and its allies. After all, the ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and throughout the Middle East have taught us that victory on today’s battlefield will not be determined by who has the greatest weapons systems or stockpiles. It will be determined by the side that can produce the necessary weapons quickly and exercise command and control effectively to execute movement and maneuver. Therefore, it all comes down to who has the best access to accurate, timely information, made available by artificial intelligence systems and drone technology on the modern battlefield. In their recent book, “The Arsenal of Democracy,” authors Eyck Freymann and Harry Halem argue that it will require the sustained will — what 19th-century military theorist Carl von Clausewitz termed one of the essential factors to victory in war — among the American people and political establishment to take the necessary steps to prevent war (and to win a war if deterrence fails). Congress certainly has a role to play in building on this year’s National Defense Authorization Act, which took steps to reform our outdated acquisitions process, but a significant amount of work remains. Over the past three decades, the U.S. defense industrial base has been neglected. Although there is no single reason for this, the combination of postwar restructuring in the 1990s and the U.S. military’s strategic shift to be able to fight low-intensity conflicts during the global war on terrorism has fundamentally changed how and which weapons systems are produced, as well as how the American warfighter is equipped and fights. The numbers at face value are concerning. For example, the number of naval shipyards in use by China sits at 35, while the U.S. has only four. The problem neither starts nor ends with the size of our Navy or our capacity to repair and produce new ships. A hot conflict in the Indo-Pacific will certainly be determined by the impact of hypersonic missile technology, in which U.S. adversaries such as China and Russia have invested heavily in recent years, as well as the adoption and effectiveness of drone and artificial intelligence systems. It’s clear, then, that any system that can deliver key information when it’s needed will play a major role in deterring China. Thankfully, the U.S. free market is capable of delivering groundbreaking systems like these into the hands of the warfighter, but the state of affairs when it comes to the Department of Defense’s acquisitions process remains a major hang-up. The degree of bureaucratic red tape and out-of-date processes makes it difficult for U.S. startups to navigate the “valley of death” (the phase of the acquisitions process between prototyping and successful procurement). U.S. Indo-Pacific Command currently relies on the Pacific Deterrence Initiative to address the logistics and supply-line problems inherent to maintaining deterrence against CCP saber rattling, but it has become fragmented and bogged down because of a lack of focus. We should be considering a refocus on this second track to maintain deterrence by keeping our forces in the region well-supplied and well aware. At the same time, we need to reevaluate how we can test drone systems on the homefront. Outdated Federal Aviation Administration regulations have hampered our ability to train with and test cutting-edge drone and counter-drone technology that could prove key to success. This will require consensus among U.S. policymakers and a unified vision between federal regulators and Congress to achieve a breakthrough. Meanwhile, we must also look toward greater integration with our allies in the Indo-Pacific, particularly Australia, Japan and South Korea. Although the combined forces of the U.S. and our democratic allies in the Indo-Pacific afford us some parity in terms of overall force deployment against the PLA, we will not be able to fight a sustained conflict if we aren’t better integrated. We must be better integrated in terms of overall strategy and in terms of supply chains and the key resources, such as rare earth minerals, necessary to sustain a war effort. Deterrence doesn’t require only producing large-scale weapon systems such as ships and planes. It also means hardening our supply chains and restoring our defense industrial base to get the modern weapons systems we need in the right place and in a timely manner. The first step we could take as a nation is to recognize how dire a threat is posed, having allowed our defense industrial base to languish. This means building a bipartisan consensus that puts U.S. national security, as well as global peace and stability, front and center. Rep. Pat Fallon represents Texas’ 4th Congressional District. He is a member of the House Armed Services Committee, Oversight and Government Reform Committee, and Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

Rep. Fallon Statement in Response to House Passage of FY26 NDAA

Position: Rep. Fallon supports the FY26 National Defense Authorization Act, citing its role in modernizing the military, streamlining defense procurement, increasing servicemember pay by 3.8 percent, and improving access to military family benefits.

| Congressman Pat Fallon Javascript must be enabled for the correct page display Skip to Content Menu About Biography Committees Our District Votes and Legislation Sponsored Legislation Services Appropriations FY27 Request Form NDAA FY27 Request Form Appropriations Request --> FY 2026 NDAA Request --> Help with a Federal Agency Sherman and Paris Townhalls Service Academy Nominations Art Competition Congressional App Challenge Tours and Tickets Congressional Veteran Commendation Program Presidential Greetings Town Hall Questions Winter Weather Preparedness Congressional Commendations Flag Request Newsletter Grant Applicants Internships Event Request Issues Key Issues Agriculture Budget Jobs and the Economy Legislation Sponsored Legislation Co-sponsored Legislation Voting Record --> Media Press Releases In the News Letters Photos --> Videos Contact Email Me E-Newsletter Sign Up Office Locations Meeting Request facebook twitter youtube instagram Open search form search Submit Press Releases Rep. Fallon Statement in Response to House Passage of FY26 NDAA Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Print this Page Share by Email Washington, September 10, 2025 Tags: Defense Washington, D.C. -- In response to the House's passage today of H.R. 3838, the Streamlining Procurement for Effective Execution and Delivery and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026, House Armed Services Military Personnel Subcommittee Chairman, Rep. Pat Fallon (TX-04), commented: “I’m proud to have voted in favor of the House’s passage of the FY26 NDAA today. This legislation is critical to modernizing our military, spurring innovation and restoring deterrence towards our adversaries abroad. "Additionally, this bill cuts red tape to make our acquisitions process more agile and rebuild our domestic defense industrial base so that we can ensure we can deliver the cutting edge systems to the American warfighter. Importantly, this bill also puts our servicemembers and their families first with a 3.8 percent payraise and improved access to benefits like healthcare, schools and housing. "The U.S. faces the most serious threat environment from near-peer adversaries since the end of the Cold War, and the FY26 NDAA is what is needed for our military to prevail.” Related News Rep. Fallon in Fox News: What Can a Former KGB Agent Teach Us About What’s in Store for America? November 10, 2025 | Posted in Op-Eds Rep. Fallon Statement in Response to Russian Drone Fleet Violation of Polish Airspace September 10, 2025 | Posted in Press Releases Rep. Fallon Statement in Response to House Intelligence Committee Passage of FY26 IAA September 10, 2025 | Posted in Press Releases Rep. Fallon Statement in Response to House Passage of FY26 NDAA September 10, 2025 | Posted in Press Releases