President Trump is about to unleash DOGE on the only government agency that has never passed an audit: the Pentagon.

With an annual budget rapidly approaching a trillion dollars per year, no other pot of discretionary spending comes close. Moreover, the Pentagon recently failed its 7th consecutive audit, underscoring an ongoing breakdown in financial accountability that would never be tolerated at a publicly traded company. An agency receiving nearly a trillion taxpayer dollars to defend our nation should be held to at least the same standard. Imposing some fiscal discipline through targeted cuts is a good place to start.

Big-ticket weapon systems that have outlived their usefulness or never really worked in the first place make for obvious targets. As DOGE master Elon Musk has already suggested, the F-35 — with its overloaded mission set, serious performance issues, and $2 trillion price tag — has earned its place on the cut list.

Looking ahead plans for a 6th-generation fighter jet also warrant scrutiny. Early estimates suggest a manned 6th-generation fighter could cost up to three times the price of an F-35. But as importantly, the strategic value of a new generation of manned fighters is highly questionable in light of advancements in long-range fires, ground-based air defenses, and unmanned drones.

The Sentinel program, an effort to replace the land-based leg of the nuclear triad with a new generation of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), is another logical target. After informing lawmakers last February of a 37 percent increase in costs, the Air Force was forced to review the program. But in certifying it to move forward, it revealed a staggering 81 percent spike in projected costs, which would bring Sentinel’s total lifecycle cost to well over $300 billion.

On top of these rising costs, ICBMs offer no meaningful capabilities that aren’t covered by our more survivable nuclear bombers and ballistic missile submarines, and with advancements in hypersonic technology, they are also increasingly vulnerable to enemy attack.

While cutting back on big-ticket items like these would save tens of billions in short order, savings from more nuanced adjustments to the Pentagon budget are also there for the taking.

A 2017 Pentagon report found that the U.S. military has nearly 20 percent more basing infrastructure than it needs across foreign and domestic military installations. The last Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process, initiated under President Bush in 2005, saved taxpayers some $3.8 billion per year. By calling for a new BRAC process, President Trump could free up the Pentagon to focus on the installations we need while saving billions by closing or consolidating those that we don’t.

President Trump may be able to act unilaterally on this. The executive branch is empowered to close domestic military installations without congressional approval “if the President certifies to the Congress that such closure or realignment must be implemented for reasons of national security or a military emergency.”

In the event that Congress fails to approve a new BRAC process, as the nation’s fiscal crisis imperils future funding for national security needs, the president could reasonably certify to Congress that the fiscal implications of failing to address excess basing capacity require executive action for reasons of national security.

Lastly, each year, separate elements of the byzantine Pentagon structure submit extrabudgetary wish lists, also known as Unfunded Priorities Lists (UPLs), for items not included in the president’s budget request. This circumvention of presidential authority, opposed by multiple secretaries of defense, fuels wasteful Pentagon spending and often comes at the expense of higher priorities included in the budget request.

President Trump can help rein in this harmful practice by urging Congress to repeal the requirement for UPLs and urge military leaders to operate through the normal budget process and submit empty wish lists, as some already have. Budgeting for national security requires a holistic assessment of our military needs, not a grab bag of pet projects for lawmakers. Ending this practice would go a long way in better enforcing fiscal discipline.

For far too long, the military industry’s significant influence in Congress has led to bad spending decisions that prioritize parochial interests over national security and fiscal responsibility. While Congress will have to play a central role in implementing the budget discipline we need, it’s clear that real leadership will need to come from the top.

President Trump, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and DOGE have a golden opportunity to embody that leadership by proposing smart, targeted cuts that will save billions and sharpen our nation’s national defense in the process.

As far as taxpayers are concerned, that DOGE will hunt.