Air National Guard leaders warned Congress that the Air Force is perilously under-resourced and urged a major increase in fighter procurement to restore deterrence and readiness. They asked for a sustained surge in new aircraft across the active, reserve, and Guard components, backed by a united message from every state adjutant general. The letter ties today’s readiness crisis to ongoing operations and argues that without decisive investment the force will keep slipping behind. The ask comes as the White House has proposed a substantially larger defense budget for the next fiscal year.
The letter to lawmakers was blunt about the current state of the service and left no room for optimistic spin. “The United States Air Force is the oldest, the smallest, and the least ready in its 78-year history,” the leaders wrote, laying out a stark case for urgent action. That line is meant to force a wake-up moment in Washington and push Congress to fund the planes and squadrons the nation needs. Republican policymakers should view that as a clear call to prioritize combat readiness over slack budget politics.
At the center of the request is a steady procurement rhythm aimed at replacing aging fleets and expanding capability fast enough to matter. The adjutants general asked for a program delivering between 72 and 100 new fighters each year across all components. They were specific about platform mixes, pressing for at least 48 new F-35s and 24 new F-15EXs as immediate priorities to modernize squadrons and preserve air superiority.
That urgency is sharpened by a rare unanimous sign-on from the National Guard leadership. All 22 adjutant generals who lead their states’ Air National Guards signed the appeal, a show of unity the Idaho assistant adjutant general described as “a pretty big deal.” Brig. Gen. Shannon Smith emphasized that the message is coming from the generals who actually command Guard units and see readiness gaps firsthand. That collective voice is designed to cut through bureaucratic inertia and force a budgetary response.
Operational pressure is part of why the Guard is pressing so hard for jets now. Leaders pointed to Operation Epic Fury and related demands as proof that current taskings are burning aircraft and crews down faster than planned. “We are burning these jets and the Airmen over time to support the joint force to accomplish the president’s goals with Epic Fury in this conflict with Iran,” the letter explains, tying procurement directly to real-world wear and tear. The math is simple: intense operations without replacement rates equal a shrinking, less effective force.
The requested buy rates are a big jump from what the Air Force has asked for in recent budget cycles, which is why the Guard’s appeal reads like a course correction. Recent requests sought 48 F-35s in 2024 and 42 in 2025, with 24 F-15EXs in 2024 and 18 in 2025, numbers the Guard now argues are insufficient. The new pitch — aiming for as many as 72 F-35s and 36 F-15EXs per year at the high end — is meant to build depth and stop the cycle of extending service life at the cost of capability. From a Republican perspective, this is about deterrence: buy what you need before you need it.
Leaders don’t sugarcoat the consequences of inaction. “If we keep dabbling under 72, that isn’t winning, that is raising the water line,” the letter warns, a sentence meant to reframe modest buys as ineffective maintenance of decline. The memo adds that if procurement stays too low, “Most of the money will go to keep them flying. In a few years, they’ll be struggling to be flyable, let alone be relevant.” That blunt assessment should prod budget hawks to prioritize fighters over smaller, politically convenient cuts.
The timing of the Guard’s plea aligns with a presidential budget blueprint that proposes a sharp increase in defense spending for the next fiscal year. That larger budget environment opens a window for Congress to fund the kind of surge the Guard says is necessary, but only if lawmakers choose to act. The Pentagon and Air Force have not yet publicly answered the Guard’s detailed ask, leaving it to policymakers to decide whether to match words with the resources required to keep American air power credible.
