ICYMI: Warren Ramps Up Pressure for Senate to Confirm Military Nominations, Calls out Reckless and Dangerous Republican Holds

"Mr. President, most people are aware that the Senate votes on nominees who have been appointed by the President to occupy top roles in almost all parts of the federal government--cabinet secretaries, judges, and ambassadors.

Less well known is the fact that the Senate must also vote to approve thousands of military promotions each year. If a colonel has done well on the job and their service's promotion board decides they're ready to be a brigadier general, the Senate must vote to approve this promotion before it can go through. Typically, the vote is a formality. These promotions are processed in big batches rather than one at a time, and they usually happen without even taking a recorded vote.

But right now the Senator from Alabama has imposed a hold on ALL senior military nominations and promotions. That means one senator is personally standing in the way of promotions for more than 184 of our top-level military leaders, holding up pay raises for men and women in uniform, blocking key senior military leaders from taking their posts, and jeopardizing America's national security.

Think about what this looks like -- these holds deprive military families of pay increases they have earned because a nominee's new pay may not take effect until the promotion goes through. Without formally being assigned a change of duty, families can't make decisions about moving or enrolling kids at a new school year for the fall.

The Chief of Staff of the Army has said, "What it really does, it affects the families and some of the kids and they're trying to figure out where they're going to go to school, when they're going to move. And all those things kind of come into the readiness of the force." And Secretary Austin has stated this delay "creates a ripple effect through the force that makes us far less ready than we need to be."

Why is one senator punishing 184 dedicated men and women who serve in our military? All because he disagrees personally with a single policy decision from the Pentagon.

It's no secret I disagree with a lot of policy decisions from the Pentagon. And as senators, we have many tools to shape and influence government policies--tools we can use without putting our national defense at risk. We can pass laws. We can conduct oversight. We can meet with administration officials. We can hold hearings.

Occasionally, a Senator may object to an individual nomination, usually to indicate opposition to that appointment or to insist on answers to questions from a federal agency. I have done this in the past, as have many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle.

The Senator from Alabama isn't doing that. Instead, he's blocking every single top military leader from advancing, indefinitely. He's snared all 184 active duty servicemembers who are currently slated for advancement and stopped every one of them dead in their tracks.

Like me, the Senator from Alabama serves on the Senate Armed Services Committee. As a consequence, he has many more opportunities than most witnesses to influence DoD policy. Many more opportunities to question witnesses, receive briefings, and to influence the annual defense bill Congress passes every single year to govern Pentagon operations. Many opportunities that don't actively threaten our national security.

He also hasn't raised any individual objections to the 184 servicemembers whose promotions are now backed up in the Senate. And he has not raised any objections to the process by which these men and women were vetted and nominated.

No, the senator is blocking 184 military promotions because he disagrees with a Department of Defense policy to help service members and their families access needed health care--specifically, to travel to access abortion care.

I disagree with him on that issue. But If he wants to press for votes to reverse DoD's health care policies, he can do that. I will oppose him, but if I lose, and Congress changes the law, then DoD will change its policies. That's how democracy works.

Holding up the promotions of every single military nominee isn't democracy; it's extortion, and that kind of extortion has serious consequences for our national defense. These holds pose a grave threat to our national security and military readiness. They actively hurt our ability to respond quickly to threats around the world.

Among the 184 nominations that the Senator from Alabama has blocked are the nominations for - the next commander of the U.S. 5th Fleet in the Middle East; the next commander of the 7th Fleet in the Pacific; our next military representative to NATO; And the current Director of Intelligence for U.S. Cyber Command; Our next Deputy Chief of Staff for Strategic Deterrence and Nuclear Integration for the Air Force; A top official in Birmingham's Army Reserves; And the former chief of staff for Operation Warp Speed, a program the Senator from Alabama has repeatedly credited for saving millions of Americans lives.

In fact, the Senator from Alabama is single-handedly holding up eleven three-star commanders, three recipients of Silver Stars, and three Purple Heart recipients. These are brave servicemembers who deserve better than to be stuck in an administrative hell--waiting for a single senator to release them to the promotions and assignments military leaders have determined that they have earned.

The Defense Department has warned that these blanket holds are making the United States more vulnerable to threats from foreign actors like China, North Korea, and Iran.

In coming months, approximately 80 three- and four- star generals and admirals, including leaders in the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps, will reach the end of their current terms--and new nominees will be slotted to replace them. In addition, if the senator's reckless hold is not lifted and the Senate cannot confirm a new Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the President may be without a principal military advisor. By the end of the year we could have 650 general and flag officers waiting for Senate confirmation.

The senator from Alabama's response to criticisms of his actions is to say that he'll keep these holds in place "until hell freezes over" unless DoD changes its healthcare travel policy.

I sincerely hope that's not true. Because holding hostage nearly the entire military leadership of the United States of America at a time when we are facing military threats around the world and our allies are literally engaged in war in Europe is dangerous, it's reckless, and it needs to stop right now.

As Chair of the Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Personnel, I care deeply about protecting our servicemembers and the integrity of our promotion system. These holds are depriving families of pay raises they earned. We're talking about gas and grocery money for families. These servicemembers should be treated with dignity and respect. And unless there is some specific problem with an individual nominee, those who have been nominated for a new rank or a new post should get the advancement that the Pentagon has recommended for them. No more politics.

I'm here today to respectfully ask my colleague from Alabama to let these promotions move forward and to find other ways to continue advocating for the policy changes that he wants to see. I'm hopeful he will set aside politics and do the right thing and allow these servicemembers to carry out their responsibilities to our nation.

Source