Republican Senator Dan Sullivan of Alaska, along with his GOP colleagues, Senators Joni Ernst of Iowa, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Todd Young of Indiana, and Mitt Romney of Utah, took to the Senate floor to decry Senator Tommy Tuberville’s holds on 115 top military nominees. These holds are a result of Tuberville’s opposition to Pentagon abortion policy, which has led to the delay of military promotions.
Over the course of more than four hours, these Republican senators read out the resumes of the nominees and argued that Tuberville’s holds were detrimental to military readiness. They emphasized that the officers affected by these holds were not responsible for the Pentagon’s policy and that this situation set a dangerous precedent in the Senate. They called on Tuberville to individually object to 61 nominations and pledged to continue coming to the Senate floor to advocate for the nominees.
Senator Sullivan, a member of the Armed Services Committee and a US Marine Corps colonel, stressed that Tuberville’s holds were disruptive to readiness during a critical global moment. He acknowledged his pro-life stance but also highlighted the importance of national security, readiness, and a strong military.
Tuberville, in defense of his holds, argued that they were not harming readiness and would continue until the Pentagon followed or Democrats changed the law.
The senators refuted Tuberville’s tactics, pointing out that the nominees had no control over the Pentagon’s policy on reproductive care. They expressed concerns about the bitterness within the military due to their careers being affected by a policy dispute they had no power to resolve.
Senator Young underlined the need for a fully staffed and competent security establishment, especially in times of conflict and instability. He emphasized his pro-life convictions but called for the nominees to move forward.
The senators also raised concerns about the precedent Tuberville’s holds would set in the Senate, leading to increased gridlock and politicization of the military. They described it as an abuse of their powers as senators to hold up promotions and careers of military personnel.
The dispute highlights the complex intersection of policy, politics, and military nominations in the Senate.