Joint Chiefs Stymied by One Idiot Senator

Tommy Tuberville's stunt is now impacting the highest levels of the military.

“Tommy Tuberville – Caricature” by DonkeyHotey is licensed under CC BY 2.0

NYT (“Tuberville Blockade Over Abortion Policy Threatens Top Military Promotions“):

A lone Senate Republican’s bid to reverse a Pentagon policy ensuring abortion access for service members is delaying the smooth transfer of power at the highest echelons of the armed forces, including in the ranks of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as a monthslong partisan dispute over social policy drags on.

Senator Tommy Tuberville, a conservative from Alabama, has been single-handedly blocking hundreds of promotions for high-ranking generals and admirals since February, refusing to relent unless the Defense Department scraps a policy — instituted after the Supreme Court struck down the constitutional right to abortion last year — offering time off and travel reimbursement to service members who need to go out of state for abortions.

Now, Mr. Tuberville’s tactics are on the brink of disrupting the Pentagon’s ability to fill its top ranks. More than half of the current Joint Chiefs are expected to step down from their posts during the next few months without a Senate-approved successor in place, leaving the president’s chief military advisory body in an unprecedented state of flux at a time of escalating tensions with China and Russia.

The Biden administration and Senate Democrats have vociferously condemned Mr. Tuberville’s blockade as dangerous and misplaced. But while many Republicans are deeply uncomfortable with his tactics, G.O.P. leaders’ criticism has been more restrained.

“I don’t support putting a hold on military nominations,” Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the minority leader, told reporters recently when asked about Mr. Tuberville’s actions. That has not been enough to dissuade the Alabama senator or his staunch supporters in the G.O.P. ranks, who have stood in for him when he was not at the Capitol to press his objections to a policy that has angered the anti-abortion Republican base.

The resulting impasse is beginning to take a tangible toll on the military. On Monday, the first of the departing Joint Chiefs, Gen. David H. Berger, the Marine commandant, will retire in a “relinquishment of office” ceremony, leaving his current deputy and nominated successor, Gen. Eric Smith, to take over without Congress’s blessing.

That this has gone on as long as it has is frustrating and, as the report notes, it’s about to get really serious.

When General Berger retires today, the Marine Corps will not have a Commandant. His successor, General Smith, is widely expected to continue to carry out the vision outlined in Force Design 2030 but, crucially, he will not have the authority to issue a new Commandant’s Planning Guidance until and unless he becomes the Senate-confirmed Commandant rather than a mere Acting Commandant. Additionally, Smith will effectively be filling the duties of the Commandant and Assistant Commandant, both full-time jobs. This means that he’ll have to delegate portions of both jobs to the various Deputy Commandants who, in turn, will have to delegate portions of their jobs to other officers.

Already, we’ve held up countless promotions at lower ranks. Including a friend and former teaching partner of mine’s promotion to brigadier general. This is impacting people’s livelihoods in addition to the normal operation of the military services.

That a single Senator—a backbencher, no less—has the ability to do this is just nuts. But, seemingly, the only workaround is a process that’s so cumbersome they’re not even bothering.

[Tuberville] has suggested that Congress pass Republican-sponsored legislation to reverse the Pentagon’s abortion access policy — or a competing Democratic bill to give the policy the force of law. He has dared Senate leaders to circumvent his blockade by voting on the promotions individually, arguing that he would be ready to approve some promotions if forced to take a vote.

But Senate aides say none of his suggested offramps are workable. Senate leaders believe it would be nearly impossible to collect enough votes, between the Democratic-led Senate and the Republican-led House, to send legislation either affirming or overturning the Pentagon’s policy to the president’s desk. And they are queasy about trying to get around Mr. Tuberville’s protest procedurally because of the amount of time it would take to plow through the Senate’s arcane hurdles for all the nominations he is holding up.

Senate leaders are also resisting pressure from rank-and-file lawmakers to make an exception for the Joint Chiefs, fearing that doing so would legitimize Mr. Tuberville’s protest — and encourage others harboring grievances with Pentagon policies to emulate his approach.

In the meantime, Mr. Tuberville has steadily rejected the compromises that Senate leaders have offered him. He refused to relent in exchange for holding a closed-door vote in the Armed Services Committee last month against a bill undoing the Pentagon’s policy. And he has publicly eschewed the idea of settling his dispute by voting on the Pentagon’s policy as an amendment to the annual defense policy bill, which is expected to begin moving through the House next week.

As to the dispute itself, it’s a response to a policy announced last October:

The Pentagon will pay for service members to travel to obtain abortions, in a move the military says will ease the burden on troops who wish to receive reproductive care and are stationed in states where the procedure is no longer legal, the department announced Thursday.

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin on Thursday directed the Defense Department to establish travel and transportation allowances to ensure service members and their dependents have access, according to a memo.

“Our Service members and their families are often required to travel or move to meet our staffing, operational, and training requirements. Such moves should not limit their access to reproductive health care,” Austin wrote.

The “practical effects of recent changes” will ultimately hurt military readiness, Austin wrote, referring to the Supreme Court’s June decision to strike down Roe v. Wade.

Austin noted that “significant numbers” of service members and their families will be forced to travel, take time off work, and pay more out of pocket to receive reproductive care.

“In my judgment, such effects qualify as unusual, extraordinary, hardship, or emergency circumstances for Service members and their dependents and will interfere with our ability to recruit, retain, and maintain the readiness of a highly qualified force,” he wrote.

Under current law, most abortions cannot be performed at military medical facilities and service members’ Tricare health insurance does not cover the cost of obtaining the procedure privately. The Hyde Amendment of 1976 prohibits the use of federal dollars for abortion unless the life of the mother is in danger.

The new policy will allow service members and dependents who must travel to access reproductive care to request travel allowances and an administrative absence from their normal duty stations so they don’t need to take leave, according to a DoD official who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the matter ahead of the policy announcement.

I’m of two minds on this policy. First and foremost, it strikes me as humane and eminently sensible. The rules of the game changed overnight and military personnel’s healthcare decisions shouldn’t be subject to the whims of politicians in whatever state they happen to have been ordered to serve. Secondarily, though, I’m skeptical that the Secretary of Defense has the authority to repurpose taxpayer dollars in this fashion.

Relatedly, while Tuberville is a clown unfit to serve in the Senate, he has a point. This really ought to be a decision made by Congress, not by fiat by the executive branch. I haven’t seen estimates of what this policy cost. While almost certainly a drop in the bucket given the staggering size of the Defense budget, it nonetheless has to be a substantial amount of money.

Moreover, there’s the matter of the aforementioned Hyde Amendment. Successive Congresses for nearly four decades have prohibited the use of federal tax dollars to pay for abortions. While the Biden Justice Department has ruled that this does not prohibit funding “expenses, such as a per diem or travel expenses, that are incidental to the abortion,” this seems to violate the clear intent of the law.

Regardless, this standoff is yet another illustration of the sorry state of Congress. The rules simultaneously allow a single Senator—one percent of the body!—to hold up hundreds of promotions and nominations on mere whim and yet make it impossible to resolve the dispute because doing things through normal order is impossible. As much as I disdain Tuberville, his core request—the Congress either overturn Austin’s order or vote it into law—is frankly, not unreasonable on its face. Yet, since Congress doesn’t pass laws on simple majority vote, it can’t actually do that.

And, of course, there’s this:

Though Mr. Tuberville has few backers in the Senate, he has been buoyed in his resistance by support from home, where constituents have cheered on his protest, and billboards paid for by the conservative Heritage Foundation line stretches of highway.

They read, “Senator Tuberville, thank you for standing for life, and against wokeness in the military.”

Sigh.

FILED UNDER: Congress, Military Affairs, National Security, US Politics, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
James Joyner
About James Joyner
James Joyner is Professor and Department Head of Security Studies at Marine Corps University's Command and Staff College. He's a former Army officer and Desert Storm veteran. Views expressed here are his own. Follow James on Twitter @DrJJoyner.

Comments

  1. MarkedMan says:

    Would it would be classless of me to point out your defense of the Senate’s traditions (this, blues slips, and of course the filibuster) when it doesn’t affect people you know?

    17
  2. The Senate is a deeply flawed institution.

    6
  3. Kurtz says:

    @Steven L. Taylor:

    The US is a deeply flawed society. And I mean this in terms of critical thinking. I don’t mean at the individual policy level.

    There is a difference between Al Franken or even Arnold Schwarzenegger and Tommy Tuberville or Donald Trump. It’s obvious the former engage in thought processes and can express the results; it’s unclear the Tuberville can do the same.

    Trump could do the first at least at some point in the past, and from what I can tell did so as President even if not as well as when he was a younger man. But he has several other forms of baggage that limit the scope of the process and shape his communication. What he does have in common with Tuberville is that they both reveal themselves to be unfit for high office.

    BONUS:

    Herschel Walker got 48.5% of the vote in the general election. 2.1% of the vote went to the Libertarian Party candidate, which forced a runoff. Walker gained 0.1% in the runoff, Warnock gained 2%.

    Let’s take a less obvious look at that. It’s not only that Walker, with his unique brand of incoherence, managed to almost win a Senate seat, with almost 1.9 million people pulling the lever for him. But that 2.1% of Georgia voters have their heads so far up an ass,* that they seem to think that there is no difference between a cognitively impaired running back and a well-spoken minister in the Senate to the point they would risk an awful outcome in a razor-thin race.

    *pick one: their own, Ayn Rand, the deceased Koch Brother, Milton Friedman, Hayek, JKB, or alternating between Ron and Rand Paul.

    12
  4. Just nutha ignint cracker says:

    @Steven L. Taylor: Certainly. Yet in some ironic parallel universe, this is what a government that was truly “of the people, by the people, and for the people” has actually looked like for some 25o years. The Founders [TM] never imagined a world in which the pool of citizens with the franchise to elect those who run the place would large enough for Coach Tuberville* to get elected. This “everybody has a say” thing is great in theory, but…maybe… a little lacking in practice?

    *Or should that be Coach Senator Tuberville?

    1
  5. Tony W says:

    It drives me crazy that the Democrats won’t fight fire with fire.

    Here’s a joker directly affecting the readiness of the United States military over his pet issue.

    Seems like the Commander in Chief could simply declare the situation a national emergency, call on the Senate to change their rules to overrule Sen. Tuberville, while privately letting the Senator know that the last penny of spending for his leech of a state is already voted on until he is out of office if he doesn’t relent.

    Perhaps when Maxwell AFB runs out of jet fuel, the good Senator will come to his senses.

    5
  6. KM says:

    This really ought to be a decision made by Congress, not by fiat by the executive branch.

    Except he’s rejecting Congressional options presented to him because he’s clearly arguing in bad faith. Ignoring that one’s inherent bodily autonomy and rights should not be up for a vote in a civilized society, he’s lying about wanting it to be decided legislatively instead of by the CoC.

    And he has publicly eschewed the idea of settling his dispute by voting on the Pentagon’s policy as an amendment to the annual defense policy bill, which is expected to begin moving through the House next week.

    This means he’s pretty sure that the House, infested with MAGA as it is, will not pass such an amendment. He’s deliberately holding up the democratic process and refusing to use democratic means like voting as he knows it won’t go his way. Like conservative bad faith efforts to “let the states decide” and then sabotage it when they vote pro-choice, Tuberville has zero intent to let this go to a true vote. Whining about “executive fiat” being one man imposing his will unjustly, he’s holding the entire military hostage as one man imposing his will by temper tantrum.

    11
  7. KM says:

    @Tony W:
    Honestly, I’m surprised he’s not running afoul of some national security laws and Red Scare legitimation. Knee-capping the military to the point we won’t have several Joint Chiefs can be seen as an active attempt to harm the military’s readiness and thus the US’ safety. Delegation only works when you have bandwidth aka peacetime; should there be an emergency, the US’ ability to respond quickly is damaged and unnecessary confusion can cause disaster. Add in the havoc he’s sown on the lower ranks and it’s even worse.

    Someone needs to start looking into these clauses to see if he can be held accountable outside of the Congressional framework. Stop playing his game and bring out the big guns or this will keep going on forever (he’s not leaving office anytime soon)

    4
  8. MarkedMan says:

    @Just nutha ignint cracker:

    The Founders [TM] never imagined a world in which the pool of citizens with the franchise to elect those who run the place would large enough for Coach Tuberville* to get elected.

    While this sounds good in theory, there has been comparable dysfunction in democracies with even severely limited franchises, including our own. While complete morons like Tuberville might not have been elected in the 1700’s there was still no shortage of mindless obstructionists and narrow issue fanatics.

    3
  9. just nutha says:

    @MarkedMan: you’re talking a completely different point in my view. A valid point for sure, but different just the same.

  10. CSK says:

    @Just nutha ignint cracker:

    Tuberville much prefers to be known as “Coach” rather than “Senator,” which pretty much tells you all you need to know. What an asshole.

    4
  11. Scott says:

    How many times do we have to talk about this POS? Is it just to aggravate me?

    https://www.outsidethebeltway.com/the-politics-of-omnibus-bills/#comment-2808715

  12. James Joyner says:

    @MarkedMan:

    Would it would be classless of me to point out your defense of the Senate’s traditions (this, blues slips, and of course the filibuster) when it doesn’t affect people you know?

    I don’t know that I’ve ever defended any of those except the filibuster—and even then, I don’t defend it except as an extraordinary measure against massive policy changes being passed by narrow margins; I’ve never supported it as regular order.

    [EDITED TO ADD: As far as I can tell, this March 2003 post was my first discussion of the filibuster at OTB. I concluded, “Used sparingly–on highly controversial legislation that would radically alter the social contract–the filibuster would be defensible as another check in our federalist, republican system. But if it is used for even routine matters like appellate court nominees, then it indeed turns the system on its head.”]

    @Scott: It’s the double whammy of his doing major things to get attention and the fact that the two main site authors have significant ties to the state he represents. Steven has lived there since 1997 and I spent many years there and my parents are both buried there.

    3
  13. steve says:

    I dont think an individual senator having this power is constitutional, rather an odd self created rule. What would happen if Biden as C-inC challenged this?

    Steve

    2
  14. James Joyner says:

    @steve: The President is commander-in-chief of the armed forces, not the Senate. Article I gives both Houses plenary power to set their own rules, with a handful of exceptions that I don’t believe apply here.

    1
  15. gVOR10 says:

    “I don’t support putting a hold on military nominations,” Senator Mitch McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the minority leader, told reporters recently

    If Schumer were to propose a suitable rules change, what are the odds McConnell would put any votes where his mouth is?

    2
  16. MarkedMan says:

    @James Joyner:

    The President is commander-in-chief of the armed forces, not the Senate

    Well, I spose he could order an assault on the Senate….

  17. MarkedMan says:

    @gVOR10: Can there be a rules change before the next Congress?

  18. RoyM4 says:

    During the bruhah about the Tailhook convention in 1991 all military promotions, not just Navy & Marine Corps, were delayed by the SASC for months.

  19. James Joyner says:

    @RoyM4: That was a very long time ago but, offhand, that strikes me as much more reasonable. SASC has a real oversight responsibility and Tailhook was a legitimate wakeup call. This is a single Senator (albeit one who’s a junior SASC member).

    3
  20. James Joyner says:

    @CSK: Indeed, his entire Senate biography is about his football career. Not a word about his committee assignments or legislative priorities.

    3
  21. Fog says:

    Tuberville has a serious purpose in doing this. He is a white supremacist to the core, (aka Christian Nationalist). This is Trump’s real base, the ones DeSantis is trying to pry away from him in a racist race to the bottom. Tuberville knows, or has been told, that for an authoritarian takeover to happen the armed forces need to be on board, or at least on the sidelines. All those black folks getting positions of authority in the armed forces must have raised the alarms. So Tommy fights back with the only means at his disposal, and considers himself a warrior of Jesus against the Satanic “woke” military.

    5
  22. CSK says:

    @James Joyner:

    And he’s referred to, reverently, as “Coach Tuberville” in his Senate bio. Did Coach decide that joining the U.S. Senate would be a good retirement hobby?

    I suppose reminiscing about his football career is all that really matters to his constituents.

  23. Just nutha ignint cracker says:

    @CSK: Bruce Springsteen expressed it best:

    Well, the time slips away and leaves you with nothing, mister, but booooooring stories of your glory days.

    1
  24. CSK says:

    @Just nutha ignint cracker:

    Very true, but ole Tubes seems to think that nothing, absolutely nothing, is of any consequence compared to football. Preventing women from having abortions for any reason whatsoever may run a fairly close second.

  25. Anjin-san says:

    A Republican making Putin and Xi happy. Is this even news anymore?

    6
  26. Franklin says:

    @Anjin-san: off topic, but I replied too late to a comment you made on the Carter’s 77th wedding anniversary post. I was curious about when you must have spent some time in the Ann Arbor area.

  27. Just nutha ignint cracker says:

    @CSK: I think it’s all about still hearing those magic words: “On it coach!” There comes a point where most of these yahoos lose credibility because of age. Maybe he was feeling his. I’ve not followed his career in a way that would tell me if he could hear the clock ticking, though. (Or at all, for that matter.)

  28. James Joyner says:

    @Just nutha ignint cracker: He was a damned good coach until he wasn’t. Granted that he caught Alabama is our longest downturn since before Bear Bryant came home, he had our number for years. Saban ended that and he was never able to recapture the magic in subsequent stops.

  29. Gustopher says:

    Additionally, Smith will effectively be filling the duties of the Commandant and Acting Commandant, both full-time jobs. This means that he’ll have to delegate portions of both jobs to the various Assistant Commandants who, in turn, will have to delegate portions of their jobs to other officers.

    Is this a typo or is there something I’m not seeing? Foo and Acting Foo are basically the same job, for most values of Foo.

    Was Smith the Commandant of X and is becoming (Acting) Commandant of Y? Why would there not be an Acting Commandant of X in that case?

    I don’t quite follow how much damage Coach Dingleberry is doing.

  30. James Joyner says:

    @Gustopher: Yes, I meant Acting Commandant and Assistant Commandant. Berger‘s job plus his current job.

  31. Gustopher says:

    @James Joyner: But wouldn’t there be a new Acting Assistant Commandant to do the Assistant Commandant job?

  32. Kazzy says:

    “Yet, since Congress doesn’t pass laws on simple majority vote, it can’t actually do that.”

    Well, it can pass laws that way. But certain folks don’t allow them to.

  33. Charley in Cleveland says:

    It would be interesting to see who – what person or what group – is actually behind this. Tuberville doesn’t have the acumen or institutional knowledge to engineer a feat that hamstrings both the Congress and the Pentagon. The coach is being coached,

  34. Long Time Listener says:

    @Gustopher: Assistant Commandant is a four-star billet. The Marine Corps has fewer four-star generals, compared to the other Services. To that end, there isn’t another four-star that they could slot in to be Acting ACMC. They’d have to promote a 3-star, which would bring us back to the original problem….

    1
  35. Blue Galangal says:

    But won’t the guardrails of democracy and precedent protect us?

  36. anjin-san says:

    @Franklin:

    Franklin,

    I don’t recall commenting on the Carter thread, though I could go on for a while about how much I admire him. Never been to Ann Arbor either – or Michigan, for that matter. I have some friends who grew up there, it sounds like a cool town.