[House Hearing, 118 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.A.S.C. No. 118-38]
ADMISSIONS, CURRICULUM, AND
DIVERSITY OF THOUGHT AT THE
MILITARY SERVICE ACADEMIES
__________
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
HEARING HELD
JULY 19, 2023
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORAMT]
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
53-628 WASHINGTON : 2024
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL
JIM BANKS, Indiana, Chairman
ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York ANDY KIM, New Jersey
MATT GAETZ, Florida CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania
JACK BERGMAN, Michigan VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas
MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida MARILYN STRICKLAND, Washington
BRAD FINSTAD, Minnesota JILL N. TOKUDA, Hawaii
JAMES C. MOYLAN, Guam DONALD G. DAVIS, North Carolina
MARK ALFORD, Missouri TERRI A. SEWELL, Alabama
CORY MILLS, Florida STEVEN HORSFORD, Nevada
Hannah Kaufman, Counsel
Ilka Regino, Professional Staff Member
Alexandria Evers, Research Assistant
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
Banks, Hon. Jim, a Representative from Indiana, Chairman,
Subcommittee on Military Personnel............................. 1
Kim, Hon. Andy, a Representative from New Jersey, Ranking Member,
Subcommittee on Military Personnel............................. 3
WITNESSES
Buck, VADM Sean, USN, Superintendent, United States Naval Academy 6
Clark, Lt Gen Richard M., USAF, Superintendent, United States Air
Force Academy.................................................. 7
Gilland, LTG Steven W., USA, Superintendent, United States
Military Academy............................................... 4
APPENDIX
Prepared Statements:
Banks, Hon. Jim.............................................. 45
Buck, VADM Sean.............................................. 62
Clark, Lt Gen Richard M...................................... 78
Gilland, LTG Steven W........................................ 49
Kim, Hon. Andy............................................... 47
Documents Submitted for the Record:
Article submitted by Mr. Gaetz............................... 99
Department of the Air Force: Officer Source of Commission
Applicant Pool Goals....................................... 103
West Point Class Composition Comparison, 2015-2020........... 104
Witness Responses to Questions Asked During the Hearing:
[There were no Questions submitted during the hearing.]
Questions Submitted by Members Post Hearing:
Mr. Davis.................................................... 118
Ms. Escobar.................................................. 114
Ms. Houlahan................................................. 107
Ms. Strickland............................................... 117
ADMISSIONS, CURRICULUM, AND DIVERSITY OF THOUGHT AT THE MILITARY
SERVICE ACADEMIES
----------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Subcommittee on Military Personnel,
Washington, DC, Wednesday, July 19, 2023.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:01 p.m., in
room 2118, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Jim Banks
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JIM BANKS, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
INDIANA, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL
Mr. Banks. The hearing will now come to order. You may be
seated.
I ask unanimous consent that the Chair be authorized to
declare a recess at any time. Without objection, so ordered.
I ask unanimous consent to allow members not on the
subcommittee to participate in today's hearing and be allowed
to ask questions after all subcommittee members have been
recognized. Without objection, so ordered.
I want to welcome everyone to this hearing of the Military
Personnel Subcommittee. Today's hearing is focused on
``Admissions, Curriculum, and Diversity of Thought at the
Military Service Academies.''
I want to thank our witnesses for being with us today. I
hope this hearing provides an opportunity for our members to
have a productive exchange with our witnesses and provide
answers to their questions.
First let me say that I believe our cadets and midshipmen
are some of the best and brightest scholars and athletes our
Nation has to offer. Each year, a small group of Americans
enter the military service academies knowing that their path
will not be easy, that it demands sacrifice and hard work, and
in the end nearly a decade or more of service to this great
country.
And that is why we are here today, to ensure that our
cadets and mids [midshipmen] are getting the first-class
education and the elite military training that they need. But I
do have some concerns.
All of the military service academies use race as selection
criteria. As Justice Roberts said only last month when striking
down affirmative action, ``Eliminating racial discrimination
means eliminating all of it. And the equal protection clause
applies without regard to any differences of race, of color, or
of nationality. It is universal in its application.''
I believe race-based admissions in any form violate the
Constitution, and the military service academies must ensure
immutable characteristics like race, like color, have no
bearing on a candidate's ability to tackle the rigors of the
military service academy.
It is for this reason that I am particularly proud of the
House of Representatives' work last week. The NDAA [National
Defense Authorization Act] strongly affirms that admission to
our service academies must be on the basis of merit, not on
skin color or ethnicity. We need the best and the brightest,
regardless of race. Nothing else.
I am also concerned that diversity, equity, and inclusion,
as well as theories like gender theory, critical race theory,
the list is endless, have replaced a foundation of scientific
facts and academic rigor.
Brand new Air Force Cadets are taught inclusive language.
They are told to use ``parents,'' ``caregivers,'' ``guardians''
instead of ``mom'' and ``dad.'' They are also told to use
``partner'' instead of ``boyfriend'' or ``girlfriend.'' This
would be laughable if it wasn't so dangerous.
Instead of being inclusive, it simply makes words
meaningless. In fact, it undermines academic rigor and the
pursuit of scientific truth in an engineering school. And at
the Naval Academy, instructors learn how to create ``safe
spaces'' for students to fend off ``triggering'' materials,
protect them from ``microaggressions,'' and shelter them from
violent words.
Never mind that these students may one day lead sailors and
Marines into battle, where there are no safe spaces and
triggers send real bullets down range. All of this--the
inclusive language, the safe spaces, the microaggressions--may
hide under a sheen of inclusivity, but it is actually an
ideology which serves a purpose. That is to remake society
according to one moral vision where truth is malleable, words
do violence, and the answer to one plus one depends on your
identity, not reason and fact.
Finally, I am concerned about how a focus on race,
identity, and other DEI [diversity, equity, and inclusion]
programs impact the education of our cadets and mids. How can a
cadet or even instructor express an opinion outside the
accepted ideology without being afraid of ridicule or being
ostracized or worse, being called a racist?
The news is replete with stories of professors not being
sufficiently anti-racist or expressing an opinion outside the
norm. Universities have websites dedicated to calling out
students and professors on campuses for microaggressions,
publicly shaming them.
I am afraid that the service academies aren't much
different than these other elite universities, where dissent
has been silenced and the free flow of ideas, a hallmark of
higher education, has all but ceased. I am deeply concerned
with the path our military service academies are on,
particularly if they continue to violate the Constitution and
use race as a factor in admissions.
I am also concerned about the future success of our cadets
and mids, considering the focus on divisive diversity programs
that elevate the importance of identity over that of duty,
honor, and service.
Before hearing from our witnesses, let me offer Ranking
Member Kim an opportunity to make any remarks as well.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Banks can be found in the
Appendix on page 45.]
STATEMENT OF HON. ANDY KIM, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM NEW JERSEY,
RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL
Mr. Kim. Yeah, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I want
to welcome our witnesses today and look forward to your
testimony.
I also want to thank Vice Admiral Buck for hosting my brief
visit to the Naval Academy earlier this week. I hope to visit
the rest of the military service academies in the near future.
And during my visit to Annapolis, I had a chance to be able
to meet with recent graduates, current midshipmen, members of
the faculty. And I will be honest, a lot of what I got to see
and the conversations we had painted a very different picture
than the picture that the chairman just went through.
You know, very oftentimes when we are talking about this
here in Congress, it makes it seem like every single class and
every single training session, every single element and hour of
the day, whether it is the military academies or other colleges
and universities, is being spent talking about diversity,
talking about DEI, talking about these different issues that we
will be talking about today.
And that just simply isn't the case. And that was something
that I heard point blank from a lot of the midshipmen, from
current--from the recent graduates, from the faculty. And when
it came to admissions as well, talking about the whole person
and how we can look at how we develop leaders for our country
going forward. That was the focus.
It is not saying that we are only looking at the issues of
race, only looking at these issues that we are talking about
today. And I just feel like we have been in this hearing room
several times already talking about these issues over and over
again this year.
And what I will say is that when I went and talked with
some of the midshipmen and they raised other issues that are
legitimate for us to focus in on about how we can improve their
leadership training, their academics. But we are not getting to
those types of issues and those priorities because we
constantly keep coming back to this.
So look, I just want to say it is important for us to just
constantly think about what role Congress plays when it comes
to supporting this training and this development of our future
leaders. Yes, we should be thinking about what we can fund,
what we can support. But our job here is not to micromanage the
faculty and micromanage the admissions process.
Be able to give them the tools, that is what we should be
doing. But I think so often we are here in this hearing room
trying to say that we know better than those that are living
this day in and day out.
And I find that to be a characteristic of hubris that I
find too often here in Congress, trying to dictate how some of
the most extraordinary leaders, some of them we have in front
of us today, are trying to guide our country going forward.
So look, we are going to have a lot of challenges getting
through this today. I am sure there will be some tense moments.
I just ask us to please kind of think through the fact that
every single person before us today is sharing the same goal
that we have, which is how do we make sure that we have the
kind of leadership that we need going forward to keep our
country safe, to have a strong national security.
We are all in it for that same reason, so let's make sure
we keep this civil, we keep this respectful, and recognizing
that we have a lot of challenges going forward here in
Congress. But hopefully we can do this today in a way that
doesn't devolve and doesn't get out of control.
So with that, I will yield back.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kim can be found in the
Appendix on page 47.]
Mr. Banks. I thank the ranking member. Each witness will
have the opportunity to present his testimony, and each member
will have an opportunity to question the witnesses for 5
minutes. We respectfully ask the witnesses to summarize their
testimony in 5 minutes or less. Your written comments and
statements were made part of the hearing record.
With that, Lieutenant General Gilland, you may make your
opening statement.
STATEMENT OF LTG STEVEN W. GILLAND, USA, SUPERINTENDENT, UNITED
STATES MILITARY ACADEMY
General Gilland. Chairman Banks, Ranking Member Kim,
distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to discuss the United States Military Academy. And
on behalf of the West Point team, thank you for your continued
support of your military academy and our over 4,400 future
leaders in the United States Corps of Cadets.
The mission of the United States Military Academy is to
educate, train, and inspire leaders of character. Through this
mission, we are charged with forging and developing the next
generation of officers to lead the United States Army's
greatest strength and its most important weapon system--its
soldiers, the citizens of our Nation--to fight and win on the
21st century battlefield.
West Point is not a college or a university, it is much
more than that because the American people expect more. We are
the United States Military Academy, a living, breathing
leadership laboratory that prepares these young men and women
to build and lead cohesive teams in the Army of 2030 and
beyond.
We train leaders through a values- and standards-based
system that provides both the foundational military knowledge
and professional skills needed to fight and win our Nation's
wars and the moral character necessary to lead our Nation's
sons and daughters as Army officers.
Our Corps of Cadets, all of whom chose to attend West
Point, represent all 50 States and our U.S. territories. They
come from a variety of backgrounds and upbringing. But what
unites them is their shared commitment to serving their
country, to supporting and defending the Constitution of the
United States, and to our Army values.
It is through our shared values that we develop the leaders
of character our Nation and the American people expect. We
educate leaders with the creative and critical thinking skills
necessary to lead, thrive, and win on the modern battlefield
through our robust curriculum of humanities and STEM [science,
technology, engineering, and math] subjects, all underpinned by
the Constitution.
We provide our graduates with the intellectual foundation
needed to outthink the Chinese and other adversaries. West
Point does not teach cadets what to think, nor do we
intellectually coddle them. Rather, we teach how to think,
pushing them beyond their comfort level to develop as agile,
resilient, critical thinkers who can successfully lead in
complex, uncertain operating environments.
We also inspire the future officers who will lead our
Nation's treasure, the men and women from across our country
who chose to serve as soldiers in the United States Army.
Through every aspect of our developmental experience and
through the interactions of staff, faculty, coaches, and
alumni, our cadets are exposed to the values and ideals
necessary to uphold and enforce standards, to lead by example
and embody what right looks like, and to give soldiers under
their charge the very best leadership. This is our
responsibility and obligation to you and to the citizens of our
Nation.
At the United States Military Academy, our vision is to be
the preeminent leader development institution. To that end, we
continually strive to be the gold standard of leader
development, preparing and inspiring the next generation of
officers to live honorably, lead honorably, and demonstrate
excellence in the 21st century Army, leaders equipped with the
professional competence needed to fight and win, but more
importantly, possess the tremendous character that leadership
demands.
I want to take an opportunity to thank this committee, and
your colleagues, for the support as West Point continues with
recovery efforts from the recent flooding in the Hudson Valley.
I am very proud of the hard work and efforts across the West
Point enterprise and how West Point, Highland Falls, and Fort
Montgomery communities have come together to help and support
each other while demonstrating the grit, resilience, and
character the Nation expects from its Army.
We look forward to working closely with the Army Corps of
Engineers, our Installation Management Command, and Congress as
we assess the damage and look to rebuild from the significant
damage that has been incurred.
I thank you again for the opportunity to discuss the state
of the United States Military Academy with you today. I would
also invite you to come visit us and see firsthand these
outstanding future leaders in action. I am confident that they
will inspire you also.
I look forward to your questions. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of General Gilland can be found in
the Appendix on page 49.]
Mr. Banks. Thank you.
Vice Admiral Buck.
STATEMENT OF VADM SEAN BUCK, USN, SUPERINTENDENT, UNITED STATES
NAVAL ACADEMY
Admiral Buck. Chairman Banks, Ranking Member Kim,
distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today on behalf of your United
States Naval Academy.
The Naval Academy's mission is to develop midshipmen
morally, mentally, and physically and to imbue them with the
highest ideals of duty, honor, and loyalty in order to graduate
leaders who are dedicated to a career of naval service.
More than any organization I have been associated with in
my 40 years as a naval officer, every member of the academy,
our faculty, staff, coaches, understand and are committed to
this mission. We strive to be the premier leadership and
educational institution for developing naval officers who will
preserve peace and prevail in conflict.
I believe, and more importantly the feedback from the
operational fleet confirms, that we are succeeding in our
mission. And integral to that success has been the support of
Congress.
Accomplishing this mission starts with our admissions
process. We strive to recruit and admit young women and men
reflective of the Nation they will serve. Each incoming class
should be cross-section of America. And your role in this
process, specifically nominating candidates for admission, is
critical to our success.
Knowing that we are charged with developing future leaders
for our Navy and our Marine Corps, the United States Naval
Academy uses a holistic process, a whole-person assessment, in
evaluating each candidate for admission.
This assessment balances objective factors included in each
applicant's application or each candidate's application, such
as rank, class rank; GPA [grade point average]; evaluations
from school officials, specifically their English and math
teachers; athletic and non-athletic activities and
achievements; leadership; and candidate fitness assessment
results, with subjective factors. These subjective factors can
help forecast attributes, such as character and resilience,
that we desire in all of our future officers.
And once these young patriots swear their oath to our
Nation on Induction Day in late June every year, we have 47 and
a half months to develop them into resilient, competent leaders
of character ready for an operational environment that is
increasingly dynamic.
Today, perhaps more so than in the past, a firm foundation
in mathematics, physical sciences, engineering principles, and
knowledge of the human condition is paramount. The educational
core curriculum at the Naval Academy is designed to provide a
robust foundation in these areas for every graduate and future
officer.
A variety of backgrounds among our faculty, staff, and most
importantly the brigade creates an educational experienced
enhanced by differing perspectives and life experiences to
sharpen critical thinking skills and prepare midshipmen to lead
in diverse environments.
A common thread throughout our curriculum is that we teach
students how to think, not what to think. The academy expects
graduates to become critical thinkers who are able to come to
their own conclusions based on a wide variety of perspectives
that they are exposed to.
Thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you
today on behalf of your Naval Academy. While I know many
esteemed leaders in Congress often visit the Naval Academy to
meet with their constituents, I, too, welcome the members of
this subcommittee, and your staffs, to visit our campus at any
time.
Sir, I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Admiral Buck can be found in the
Appendix on page 62.]
Mr. Banks. Thank you.
Lieutenant General Clark.
STATEMENT OF LT GEN RICHARD M. CLARK, USAF, SUPERINTENDENT,
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY
General Clark. Chairman Banks, Ranking Member Kim, and
other distinguished members of the committee, good afternoon.
And on behalf of the men and women of the United States Air
Force Academy [USAFA], thank you for all that you do to support
the development of our cadets.
This support enables the success of not only our academy
mission, but ultimately the mission of the Air Force and the
Space Force, as we prepare leaders of character ready to take
on the challenges of a rapidly changing and increasingly
volatile world.
I would also like to thank my fellow Superintendents,
Admiral Buck and General Gilland, for their partnership and
friendship as we collaborate on our shared mission.
Additionally, I am honored to have my mom and dad, Margo and
Richard Hunter, here today. Thank you for your unending
support.
Our academy is on an upward and ambitious trajectory, and
we also face challenges. Some are unique to our mission and
others are shared with universities and the communities across
our country. My daily interactions with our cadets leaves me
proud and inspired, but we still have some work to do in
upholding the high standards our society rightfully expects
from us.
To ensure we are meeting these standards, I have three
priorities to recognize and overcome not only today's
challenges, but also those that our graduates will encounter in
an era of rapid change and renewed strategic competition.
My first priority is one that will always be the core
purpose of our academy: we must develop leaders of character to
lead our Air Force and Space Force. Character is the
cornerstone of leadership, and is the hallmark of an Air Force
Academy graduate.
We put our Air Force core values into action through
something we call the ``Leader of Character Framework.'' When
we put integrity first, we are embodying what it means to live
honorably. When we are committed to service before self it
enables us to lift others and be their best possible selves,
even at our own expense.
And when we demonstrate excellence in all we do, we elevate
performance both as individuals and across our entire academy
community with the drive and mindset to be better every day
than we were the day before.
We are all leaders at USAFA and we must all embrace the
framework and make it part of our personal leadership. These
values will ensure that we are preparing our cadets to be the
leaders our Nation demands.
My second priority is to prepare leaders for future
conflict. We never lose sight that we are building warfighters.
Competition is growing and we cannot afford to fall behind in
the developing domains of air, space, and cyberspace. Preparing
for the future fight is a significant challenge, but with great
challenges come great opportunities.
We are poised to be the drivers of change that modern
combat demands. Academically and militarily, we are focused on
our national security challenges--China, Russia, North Korea,
Iran, and violent extremists--making sure we develop creative,
bold, and critical thinkers ready for an era where conflict is
unpredictable.
We understand our warfighters must have the skills to
execute in joint environments beyond conventional combat. Our
cadets must be creative and innovative and ready to solve
problems we don't even know about yet. And we must look 5, 10,
or even 20 years into the future in order to stay ahead of our
adversaries and to give our Nation the competitive edge it
needs.
My third priority is to cultivate a climate of dignity and
respect. We cannot and will not tolerate degrading or demeaning
conduct of any kind. Any instance of sexual assault, sexual
harassment, discrimination, or an atmosphere that tolerates
these behaviors in our community degrades our warfighter
mission and readiness.
Creating a culture of dignity and respect requires that we
take a hard look at ourselves and have the difficult
conversations needed to examine whether we have an environment
that allows each member of our community to thrive.
Through this reflection, we recognized the need for a
culture reset and introduced our ``Let's Be Clear'' campaign
focused on driving down the prevalence of sexual harassment and
violence at our academy.
We must also embrace our diversity as a strength. Our
military is comprised of people from every congressional
district, every community, and every demographic in America,
and our cadets will have to lead people who don't look like
them, don't think like them, don't talk like them. But
ultimately, they have to build and lead teams with one common
goal: to support and defend the Constitution of the United
States.
If we develop them to lead with dignity and respect, they
will fully employ the creative, innovative, and problem-solving
capabilities of our airmen and guardians. They will outpace and
outthink our adversaries. And they will win our Nation's wars.
I am proud of the direction of our academy, and I am fully
confident in the capabilities of our cadet, faculty, and staff
to take on the challenges we face as we prepare leaders of
character our Nation expects and deserves.
Thank you, and I look forward to discussing how we can work
together to ensure mission success.
[The prepared statement of General Clark can be found in
the Appendix on page 78.]
Mr. Banks. Thank you very much. Thank you to all three of
you for being here. I think this is really important.
Ranking Member Kim and I are going to defer to members on
each of our sides before we ask our questions. So we will begin
with Representative Gaetz.
Mr. Gaetz. A diverse and inclusive force is a warfighting
imperative. This is on a slide at the Air Force Academy.
General Clark, do you agree with that statement?
General Clark. I do agree with that statement, sir.
Mr. Gaetz. So I mean were the Mongols diverse?
General Clark. Well, sir, I am not really as versed on
Mongol warfighting as I am on U.S. warfighting.
Mr. Gaetz. How about the Vikings, were the Vikings diverse?
General Clark. Again, sir, I am looking at our country, the
most diverse country in the world.
Mr. Gaetz. Sure, sure, but this is about a warfighting
imperative. How about the force in Ukraine, are the Ukrainians
fighting the Russians a diverse force?
General Clark. Sir, once again, my concern is the people
that I am charged to build into leaders----
Mr. Gaetz. Right, but you would acknowledge that throughout
history, including present history, that statement hasn't borne
true in every example, right?
General Clark. Sir, what I would say is that those
countries have to rely on the full force of their population to
build a warfighting force to win our wars.
Mr. Gaetz. Yeah----
General Clark. And that is why it is important for us to be
diverse, because our Nation----
Mr. Gaetz. So let's look at the population that actually
makes up the fighting force frequently. Now, we have more men
than women, right, 70-30-ish?
General Clark. That is correct.
Mr. Gaetz. And of the men we have, most of them are not
transgender men, most of them are cisgender men, right?
General Clark. Yes, sir.
Mr. Gaetz. But yet at our academies we push something
called the Brooke Owens Fellowship. Are you familiar with that?
General Clark. I am, yes, sir.
Mr. Gaetz. And in that fellowship, it specifically says
``if you are a cisgender man, this program isn't for you.'' So
you just said that your answer on why we do such, this full hug
of these diversity concepts is because it is all about the
fighting force that we draw from.
But you are literally pushing a program in the academies
that says if you are a cisgender woman, a transgender woman, a
nonbinary, agender, bigender, two-spirit, demi-gender--what is
demi-gender?
General Clark. Sir, that is a term of the people that are
eligible for that particular scholarship that is available to--
--
Mr. Gaetz. But what is a demi-gender person?
General Clark. It is a person who looks at their gender in
a different way than I do, sir.
Mr. Gaetz. Well, sure that is all of these people. You are
a cisgender man, you don't even get to apply.
General Clark. Well.
Mr. Gaetz. Do you know what demi-gender really means?
General Clark. I am not really sure, sir.
Mr. Gaetz. Right, so do you know what agender means? All
one word, not ``a,'' space ``gender, but ``agender''?
General Clark. Sir, I don't.
Mr. Gaetz. Right, so here we are pushing a fellowship,
calling for people that you don't even know what the words
mean. And the number one group of people, the cisgender men,
are excluded.
Now, in the name of diversity, equity, and inclusion,
should we be pushing programs that we can't define that exclude
the largest group of service members?
General Clark. Well, sir, first, that program is not an Air
Force Academy program, it is a program open to our entire
country.
Mr. Gaetz. Right, but you guys----
General Clark. So we allow----
Mr. Gaetz. You advocate for it within the academy.
General Clark. We allow our cadets to apply for it.
Mr. Gaetz. Why are you allowing your cadets to apply for a
program when you cannot define the basic terms of eligibility?
General Clark. Because it is an opportunity for us to
develop them as warfighters, and we look for every opportunity
that we can----
Mr. Gaetz. But you don't even know what the words mean. How
can you use this as a way to develop the warfighters if you
don't know what it means?
General Clark. Well, some of those terms may not be
applicable to us at the Air Force Academy, but some are. And
so----
Mr. Gaetz. But well if you don't know what they mean, it is
hard to tell if they are applicable or not. So I think one of
the reasons why some of this stuff has gotten into the
academies is because we don't have the same oversight from the
Board of Visitors.
And Mr. Chairman, I seek unanimous consent to enter into
the record an article from the Washington Examiner entitled,
``To Push Woke Ideology, Biden Illegally Gutted Military
Academy Oversight Boards.''
[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
on page 99.]
Mr. Gaetz. And so in this piece, it goes through a timeline
where on September 8th, 2021, all of President Trump's
appointees were fired. On September 17th, Secretary Austin
created Board of Visitors subcommittees, and then he populated
those subcommittees with people who weren't on the Board of
Visitors.
Have you ever seen that happen before?
General Clark. Sir, our Board of Visitors is populated and
supports us in great fashion.
Mr. Gaetz. Right, what about the subcommittee, are there
people on the Board of Visitors subcommittees who are not on
the Board of Visitors?
General Clark. I can't answer that, sir.
Mr. Gaetz. Seems like something we ought to know.
General Clark. Yes, sir. I am not sure.
Mr. Gaetz. Right, but that would odd, right. I mean, here--
let me ask the question this way. You don't have any basis to
disagree with the reporting here in the Washington Examiner
that literally we have people who are not on the Board of
Visitors who are serving on these subcommittees. You have no
basis to disagree with that, do you?
General Clark. Sir, I am not exactly sure of the question
you are asking, so, I will have to take that for record so I
can understand what you are--exactly what you are asking.
Mr. Gaetz. Look forward to your answer, I hope. Thank you.
Mr. Banks. Representative Escobar.
Ms. Escobar. I would like to thank our panel for your
service to our Nation and for your presence here today. And I
feel like I have to apologize in advance.
You are going to have to live through what we have been
living through on this subcommittee and on our committee this
Congress where we have colleagues who are intent on doing
everything possible to paint any effort by the Federal
Government to be inclusive and to be diverse and representative
of our country as divisive. That is the word that is being
used.
I would like to ask each one of you please if you can
explain to us why is it important to have a diverse population
in your academies? What is the benefit of having a diverse set
of talented leaders in the academies? And General Clark, we
will start with you, and then we will work our way to each
member.
General Clark. Thank you, ma'am. I think I can speak for
all us that we are developing leaders that will lead our
fighting force. In our case, it is the Air Force and the Space
Force, which is made up of people from across our country,
regardless of demographic, socioeconomic status, geographics,
every congressional district.
We have to ensure that our cadets are prepared to lead in
that environment, to lead those diverse teams, to build them as
a fighting force, and to move them forward to the same goal,
the common goal of supporting and defending our Constitution.
And if our cadets can't lead people that don't necessarily
look like them or think like them or talk like them, then we
are going to fail. Because our Air Force, our Space Force is
just a series of teams that are made to go win our wars. And
that is what we are training our cadets to do, to lead our
country in that endeavor.
Ms. Escobar. So it is in our self-interest.
General Clark. Absolutely, ma'am.
Ms. Escobar. To promote diversity.
General Clark. Absolutely.
Ms. Escobar. Sir.
Admiral Buck. Good afternoon, ma'am. I concur with my
colleague at Air Force. We are looking to build teams that are
ready to win wars, defend our Nation, and work as effectively
as they can. In my professional opinion, diversity, a
complement of diversity on our teams, helps them do that.
I define diversity across a myriad of aspects. It could be
gender diversity, racial diversity, but it is diversity of
thought. It is the diversity of life experiences, of
backgrounds, socioeconomic status. It is a diversity of
thought.
And it has been proven for over 100 years in the U.S.
military when we have diverse teams sharing all of that type of
diversity, they are very, very effective in defending this
Nation.
Mr. Banks. Admiral, please turn your mic on.
Admiral Buck. Sorry. I was using God's microphone, sorry. I
have completed my remarks.
Ms. Escobar. Thank you.
General Gilland. Representative Escobar, our Nation's Armed
Forces are made up of the people that come in that represent
our Nation. The people, the young men and women that join the
Armed Forces come from all over the world. They are made up--
they come from different backgrounds, they come from different
upbringings, potentially they have different value sets.
They come into the Armed Forces and we develop them in
order to achieve a common goal, which is, you know, defending
our Nation in time of need and swearing to the Constitution of
the United States. As we develop leaders of character, in order
to lead this force, they have got to understand who their
people are and they have got to be critical thinkers.
And we develop critical thinking skills. And they have got
to be able to have hard and difficult conversations in all
different spaces, in different disciplines. So that is why I
think it is a strength and why we have got to continue, as the
service academies, to draw upon that strength and promote it
across our Armed Forces.
Ms. Escobar. I appreciate that. I am running out of time,
and so I just want to summarize. It is advantageous to us, in
order to embrace diversity, number one. Number two, it makes us
stronger to embrace diversity. And number three, our country is
diverse, so we should reflect that diversity.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Banks. Thank you. Representative Stefanik.
Ms. Stefanik. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Studies conducted at your military service academies
routinely show that academic merit, specifically standardized
test scores, highly correlate to GPA, order of merit at
graduation, and even success as an officer.
However, Admiral Buck, the Naval Academy is the only
service academy that still does not require standardized test
scores on their applications, citing, ``Barriers caused by
COVID-19 [coronavirus] and likewise the disruptions for
students who plan to apply for admission.''
Can you explain how the U.S. Naval Academy currently faces
barriers caused by COVID-19 that the two other service
academies do not?
Admiral Buck. Yes, ma'am, I believe the other sister
service academies do follow the same position we are. Pre-
COVID, we required standardized tests, and we had for decades
and decades and decades as one of the important objective
measures that we would like to have to consider a candidate's
record in competition with others that apply.
When COVID hit, we quickly realized that many, many
students around the country's ability to take the test, to find
a testing facility, were limited because of things that were
closed down, very limited availability. And so we, like
probably every other institution of higher education in the
country, we moved into what we call at the Naval Academy test-
flexible.
We still desired to have standardized tests as part of an
applicant's record. They are a very good, as you state, they
are a very good indicator of success at the Naval Academy,
especially in the first 2 years, where they take a series of
classes in calculus and calculus-based physics.
But when we realized that we might have to not miss talent
that is applying from States where they could not take the
test, we adopted the test-flexible option. There is
approximately today, present at the academy, we have a little
bit less than 3 percent of our midshipmen across three classes
right now still attending that did not submit SATs. They didn't
take them or they did not submit them, and we admitted them.
We are currently conducting some analysis to see how they
are doing. We are not complete with that work yet. And when we
conclude that analysis, that is when we are going to begin to
determine whether standardized testing should still be an
objective measure that we demand, or whether we move away from
it.
But that jury is still out, ma'am, because these students
are still progressing through those calculus classes and
calculus-based physics.
Ms. Stefanik. And Admiral, you are aware of the language in
the NDAA on this issue of requiring standardized tests for all
military academies, are you not?
Admiral Buck. As I understand it, ma'am, in the NDAA as it
is drafted, there is language for that, yes, ma'am.
Ms. Stefanik. That is correct, with unanimous support, that
will require all of our service academies. So we believe it is
important to have a fact-based, fair, and equal opportunity to
succeed at our academies and make sure that we are identifying
the absolute best and brightest talent nationwide.
So thankfully, I led that amendment in this year's NDAA
alongside Senator Tom Cotton that will require all of our
service academies to consider standardized test scores in their
applications.
But it is not just the Naval Academy that has problems in
the admissions process, because I do think we all know we are
in post-COVID time. We should return to requiring standardized
tests.
But also a RAND study done at the Air Force Academy clearly
showed that the academy's selection panel score was working in
the opposite way as intended. And according to the study, the
relationship between the selection panel score and academic
success was significant, but in the wrong direction. Higher
selection panel scores were associated with a much lower
likelihood of academic success at the Air Force Academy.
What is your comment on that, Lieutenant General Clark?
General Clark. Yes, ma'am. We are very diligent about
creating an academic composition for every one of our
applicants to ensure success at the Air Force Academy. We hold
to our weighted values that we look at for every cadet. And
that gives us an indication as to whether or not they are going
to succeed.
But we also look at the whole person. We look at every
aspect of them, their background, their life experience, their
socioeconomic status. It is a whole-person concept, because we
are a factory to develop leaders of character, and we want to
know that an incoming cadet has a propensity to be that leader
of character.
So there are indicators that help us determine that as
well. And it is both the academic composition and that whole-
person concept that allow us to pick the right people to go out
and lead our Air Force and Space Force.
Ms. Stefanik. But it is troubling that the selection panel
score is correlated with lower academic success at the academy,
would you agree?
General Clark. Well, I am not sure that that is actually
the case. Our cadets come in with the highest academic comps,
and we meet those----
Ms. Stefanik. I would refer you to the RAND study. I yield
back.
Mr. Banks. The gentlelady's time is expired. Representative
Horsford.
Mr. Horsford. I want to thank our panel, thank you for your
service. You all mentioned the importance of cultivating
diverse and effective leaders in your services. As you know,
the Supreme Court in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard
exempted the service academies from its affirmative action
ruling in a footnote to the decision.
Although I strongly believe this double standard
demonstrates the flaws in the court's majority decision, I
suspect that the decision to include that exemption was rooted
in the fact that affirmative action, which does still exist, is
necessary for national security.
What specific initiatives and programs have been
implemented by your service academy to foster a more diverse
and inclusive environment for cadets and midshipmen?
Lieutenant General Gilland, it is good to see you again.
And I know in a couple of weeks the military academy will be
coming to my district to promote the academy and to see
firsthand the opportunities that are available. So thank you
for that.
General Gilland. Representative Horsford, thanks for the
question. It is good to see you.
The initiatives that we have through our admissions office
is that we have what is called the leadership, ethics, and
diversity workshops and seminars that go out to various areas
in our country to, really to promote awareness of the military
academy, but then also our Armed Forces, the Army specifically.
We go into different areas, specifically schools, looking
at middle schools and high schools in order to essentially
plant the seed into young men and women that there are
tremendous opportunities that reside within service in our
Armed Forces and at the service academies.
We also have STEM workshops, STEM workshops that are
focused--that are conducted both at West Point, but we also, we
have teams that will go to different areas and really to focus
on middle school students in order to expose them to the STEM
areas in order to, again, to identify those who may have the
interest, the desire to serve their Nation.
But also, these are the topics that we have in study at the
respective service academies and to present the opportunities
that are available to our young men and women across our
Nation.
Mr. Horsford. To that end, how are the service academies
collaborating with communities to enhance recruitment efforts
and how can Congress assist in those efforts?
General Gilland. Sir, I believe that it is a team effort.
Given that every State is represented at the United States
service academies, or the military service academies, we have
to work together in identifying those young men and women who
are within your districts and States, in communities to--for
their passion for service to our Nation.
And then are they qualified respectively across a host of
different considerations to go to a service academy. There is
also many different ways to serve, which includes ROTC [Reserve
Officers' Training Corps], enlistment into our Armed Forces,
etc.
But what we do is we want to work collaboratively with you
all, as the primary, actually the majority of the nominations
come from our Congress. We want to work together to identify
those young men and women that are in your respective
constituents to have the opportunity to come to a military
service academy.
Mr. Horsford. It is one of the best parts of this job is
nominating constituents to the service academies. I take great
pride in the program that my office leads in partnership with
our military bases. I have Nellis Air Force Base, Creech Air
Force Base, the National Test and Training Range, as well as
the Hawthorne Army Depot in Mineral County.
And I also wanted to bring up the perspective, and
Lieutenant General Clark, maybe you can speak to this.
Diversity also means geographic diversity, correct?
General Clark. Absolutely, sir.
Mr. Horsford. Thank you. I represent 50,000 square miles
throughout Nevada, very remote communities, communities that
can be considered frontier. So I strongly believe recruitment
strategies must meet people where they are. My constituents in
these communities are less likely to have reliable internet and
often must drive hours to recruitment events.
Lieutenant General Clark, how are the U.S. military
academies adapting their recruitment strategies to cater to
rural communities effectively?
General Clark. Yes, sir, thank you for that question. And
we go to great efforts, in fact, we added a number of ``Gold
Bar'' lieutenants as recruiters to our Air Force Academy to
work as admissions counselors, to go out and conduct that kind
of outreach that you are talking about.
We also have embedded lieutenants into our recruiting
stations as well so that they can have a base to travel from
and extend from there to different areas, especially some of
the rural areas.
And then finally, we have what we call opportunity
districts. And if there is a district that----
Mr. Banks. The gentleman's time has expired. Representative
Waltz.
Mr. Horsford. Can he finish his statement? He was mid-
sentence.
Mr. Banks. Representative Waltz.
Mr. Waltz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And I just want to address this kind of, this narrative
that we consistently hear from political appointees in the
Pentagon, from our colleagues on the other side of the aisle
that Republicans are blowing these issues out of proportion,
that we are exaggerating.
And I just, I cannot state strongly enough, if we did not
have cadets, military members, their families bringing these
issues to us on a consistent basis, we wouldn't be addressing
them here. I have an entire binder of issues, some of them
from--one of them from a conservative Muslim family, another of
them from a conservative Jewish family.
And the question I would ask the other side of the aisle,
the ranking member, and you all is why weren't they comfortable
in an inclusive environment going through their chain of
command? And that is something that I think I encourage you to
deeply, deeply think about.
In that vein, General Clark, an Air Force Academy professor
wrote a Washington Post op-ed that she proudly teaches critical
race theory at the Air Force Academy. I want to read to you
some quotes from the leading proponents of this ideology
because I don't think Americans know truly how divisive and
destructive this ideology is.
One of them we have here, ``A positive White identity is an
impossible goal.'' White identity is inherently, because of the
skin color, apparently, is inherently racist. ``White people do
not exist outside the system of White supremacy.'' This isn't
100, 200 years ago, this is today.
``This does not mean that we should stop identifying as
White and start claiming to be some other type of race. To do
so is to deny the reality of racism in the here and now.'' This
isn't a way of thinking or a history class, this is present-day
indoctrination.
And this denial, to deny all of that, would be color-blind
racism. So rather this author strives to be less White and
therefore less racially oppressive because of his privilege.
That is from the author of `White Fragility'.
General Clark, do you agree with that statement?
General Clark. Sir, what I will tell you is you mentioned
our instructor who talked about teaching----
Mr. Waltz. Is currently still teaching at the Air Force
Academy, right?
General Clark. Absolutely, yes, sir. Who talked about
teaching about critical race----
Mr. Waltz. But do you agree with that statement? I only
have two minutes left for the American people to ask you these
questions.
General Clark. Well, sir, I would like to talk about your
question about critical race theory and the instructor if that
is okay first.
Mr. Waltz. Very quickly please. But first, do you agree
with--I mean, you are the leader of the institution, this
faculty member is on your staff. Do you agree with that type of
sentiment?
General Clark. Sir, I don't--that is not what she was
espousing. She was not indoctrinating----
Mr. Waltz. ``White Fragility'' is a leading book in the
critical race theory mantra of books and thinking.
General Clark. Yes, sir. She was encouraging the discourse
on the topic, the civil discourse so that our cadets could
understand how to----
Mr. Waltz. Would you encourage someone who says they are
teaching White supremacy to have that discourse?
General Clark. Sir, we encourage all civil discourse so
that our cadets can learn how to think.
Mr. Waltz. Right, and at Cal Berkeley, fine. But in an
institution that is teaching our leaders to defend, future
military members to die for civilian institutions that are
being described as inherently racist and a class of people
because of their skin color, that is offensive. That runs
against your priorities.
General Clark. Yeah, absolutely, sir. We are teaching
critical thinkers, though. And we want our cadets--we want our
cadets----
Mr. Waltz. That is offensive to me. That is racist.
General, respectfully, that is racist. Thank you. But just----
General Clark. I am not----
Mr. Waltz. Just so that we are clear, this was a speaker
that was at the Air Force Academy National Character and
Leadership Ceremony, Dr. Eddie Glaude, that spoke to current
day cadets. ``Every reckoning in the United States has carried
with it betrayal. At every moment in which a new America is on
the verge of being reborn, the umbilical cord of White
supremacy has been wrapped around the baby's neck, choking the
life out of it.''
This was at a conference just last year. I think, again,
this type of rhetoric, because we hear this from the other side
as well, of course we want to teach history. Of course we want
equal opportunity for every American. This is divisive. This
isn't what unifies us.
So I just have one more question, and I will throw it over
to you, Admiral Buck. Do you have any empirical evidence, do
you have any data, for example, that shows that a submarine
crew is more combat-ready or effective because of the diversity
mix? Because of the different mix of, say, skin color?
Mr. Horsford. That is not the only form of diversity.
Mr. Waltz. Mr. Chairman. No, I absolutely agree. But we
don't see in many box-checking, we are not looking for
religious diversity or other types of diversity. Or frankly, my
wife who looks White but she is 100 percent Arab. She doesn't
have a box.
Mr. Banks. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Waltz. But I would like to reclaim my time, a few
seconds, just to ask the question, Mr. Chairman, for the
interruption.
Mr. Banks. We will try to do another round of questions
later and we will have an opportunity to do that.
Mr. Waltz. Okay, Mr. Chairman, I hope we have an
environment here where we don't interrupt other members.
Mr. Banks. I completely agree, and I caution all members to
respect each other's time.
Representative Sewell.
Ms. Sewell. I want to thank all of our witnesses for being
here today.
I want to start by saying that diversity is truly America's
strength. It is something that we should take seriously and not
politicize or weaponize.
Second, our service academies teach students how to think,
not what to think. Learning about diversity, our Nation's
history, or other races and cultures help our students become
critical thinkers. It does not train them to hate this country
or any race. To assume our students cannot handle this
information is truly an insult to their intelligence and ours.
One of the facts of our Nation's history is that for
centuries, African Americans were systematically denied the
opportunity to pursue higher education, leaving a painful
history of discrimination that still persists today.
So when the Air Force Academy's class of 2027 is only 4
percent Black, you can't tell me that our military or service
academies spend too much time and too much money or attention
on diversity. I daresay, African Americans definitely make up
more 4 percent of our military.
Our corps officers are far less racially diverse than our
enlisted troops and does not reflect society as a whole. Our
military is the best in the world, and it will stay that way as
long as we have the best players on the field, if you will.
My first question is to you, Lieutenant General Clark. When
aspiring for leadership positions, I often tell my interns
that, you know, you have to see it to be it, or some people
feel that way. And I know for me, interning for my Member of
Congress when I was in college, and that was a while ago, was a
really important part of me deciding to run for Congress 25
years later.
So, Black students can be told that they have the
opportunity to lead, but when they see General Austin, I mean,
Secretary Austin and they see you and they see so many others,
often that proves that they indeed can do it.
So from your personal experience, can you speak to why
representation in officer corps is so important for the
students that you recruit?
General Clark. Thank you, ma'am. I believe it is important
because, first of what you said, we want people of whatever
demographic they are from, whatever background they are from to
know that they can succeed in our organization. That those
opportunities are there.
But also, when they are leading our broader Air Force and
our Space Force, they are going to lead a force made up of
Americans. And those airmen and guardians that they are going
to lead need to know that they are not only represented amongst
their own force, but they are also represented amongst their
leadership.
And that helps the leadership as well as the force that
they are leading to connect so that we can all drive towards
the common goals. And I think is it vitally important----
Ms. Sewell. Thank you, sir.
General Clark. That we have a good balance of diversity.
Ms. Sewell. Thank you.
General Clark. Thank you, ma'am.
Ms. Sewell. You know, I am proud that my district is home
to Marion Military Institute, one of the 4 military junior
colleges. Impressively, MMI has had 456 service academy
appointments in 5 years. We are very proud that Marion Military
Institute, not only in the district but in the rural part of my
district.
Can each of you speak to the important role that the
military junior academies and preparatory schools have in
building a pool of diverse, qualified candidates for these
academies? And I will start with you--doesn't matter.
Admiral Buck. Thank you for that question, ma'am. We have,
at the Naval Academy, we have affiliated with 17 different
private schools around the country that we call our foundation
schools. They complement our Naval Academy Prep [Preparatory]
School, which is located up in Newport, Rhode Island, to have
an additional year of preparation before matriculating to the
Naval Academy.
Some of those 17 schools are the junior military academies
that you described.
Ms. Sewell. Are they important in terms of creating a pool
of diverse candidates for your academy?
Admiral Buck. They are very, very important. They have
geographic diversity, they are spread all around the country.
So their populations that come may come from their local area
that learned about the military because they were in proximity
to that school.
So they are value-added in helping us recruit and build an
applicant pool----
Mr. Banks. The gentlewoman's time has expired.
Ms. Sewell. Thank you, Admiral.
Mr. Banks. Representative Moylan.
Mr. Moylan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
As I have been listening to my colleagues' questions during
this hearing, diversity, equality, and inclusion training seems
to be a hot topic. However, I would like to take a moment and
discuss if these efforts are properly targeted to accomplish
their stated goals to create a more inclusive society, or if
this training does or does not serve a role in our Nation's
security.
So the question to all the witnesses, hypothetically, if
the average high school graduate in America did not know that
Alaska exists or is part of the United States, could that
problem have an impact on national security? An affirmative,
please.
General Gilland. Sir, if I may, with regards to your
question, if our population didn't know that Alaska exists,
would that be a national security problem. Is that----
Mr. Moylan. Right, could that impact our national security?
General Gilland. I think that where Alaska resides in the
geographic location of our United States, it is significant in
its location, sir.
Mr. Moylan. Absolutely, thank you. I suppose that will be.
Admiral Buck. I concur, sir.
Mr. Moylan. General.
General Clark. I concur, yes, sir.
Mr. Moylan. Thank you. Now, a similar question. If the
average high school graduate in America did not know that Guam
exists or is part of the United States, could that be a
problem--could that problem have an impact on national
security?
Admiral Buck. Yes, sir, I agree with that.
General Clark. Yes, sir, absolutely.
General Gilland. I agree with my colleagues, sir.
Mr. Moylan. Thank you. And I believe that the lack of
education on the existence of the importance of U.S.
territories at a high school level does constitute a national
security weakness.
Mr. Chairman, I request unanimous consent to enter record
two maps of the United States, one as representative of those
often used in high school students--by high school students
that does not depict the territories as part of the United
States. And one which is an accurate U.S. map that does depict
the territories as part of the United States.
Mr. Banks. Without objection.
[The information referred to was not available at the time
of printing.]
Mr. Moylan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Activists pushing diversity, equality, and inclusion
training seem to have never been interested in the real
equality or inclusion, because if they were, Guam would not be
forgotten.
So a question. I would like to ask the witnesses, can you
guarantee to me that every single graduate of your service
academy knows the 50 States, the 5 territories, and the
District of Columbia are all part of the United States?
Admiral Buck. I can say yes, sir, for the United States
Naval Academy.
General Clark. And yes, sir, for the Air Force Academy.
General Gilland. Sir, we are committed.
Mr. Moylan. Thank you. And rather dealing with DEI
distractions or the perceived barriers of military service that
today's hearing has touched upon, I inserted language into the
House-passed NDAA to remove the cap on nominees from Guam at
service academies, allowing me to nominate a full 5 candidates
at each academy rather than 4 candidate cap that is presently
law.
One last question also, please. What efforts are being done
to specifically recruit for military service academies in Guam?
General Clark. Sir, I will start. We obviously have a
presence on Guam at Anderson Air Force Base, and that affords
us a great opportunity for recruiting and bringing in some of
the Guamanian folks who live in Guam into our academy and into
our service. So we do have great opportunity there.
Admiral Buck. Sir, likewise at Naval Station Agana we have
a very strong Navy presence there that are homeported there
with families.
We also have expats who served in our United States Navy
who have gone back home and they serve as ``Blue and Gold
Officers'' and great representatives of our Navy, and advocates
for our academy.
General Gilland. Sir, I will have to come back to you with
specific outreach efforts to Guam.
Mr. Moylan. I appreciate that.
By the way, I am an ROTC graduate from the University of
Guam, Army ROTC.
Thank you. And I appreciate the witnesses and I appreciate
your service.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. Banks. Thank you.
Representative Tokuda.
Ms. Tokuda. Thank you very much, Chair. And I do appreciate
the delegate from Guam bringing up proper maps, as sometimes
Hawai'i finds itself in the wrong position many times.
But I want to elaborate just slightly on that particular
thread that you mentioned.
You know, talking about understanding our history,
historical facts, historical cultural context as well.
When we look at Guam, for example, in a few days we will
celebrate the liberation of Guam on the 21st from the
occupation of Japan. Is it important, then, as we train our
service men and women, our soldiers, to look at the Indo-
Pacific, yeah, and the first island chain right there that they
do understand that Guam at one point, yes, it is territory now,
but was occupied by Japan during World War II. And that there
still exists, even to this day, some cultural, social tensions
that may exist between the two countries or those of those
ethnic origins?
Admiral Buck. Ma'am, it is a strategic imperative that
everybody in our Navy, everybody in our military services
understand where all of our territories are, and then
geographically where they stand, especially out in the Western
Pacific in the first and second island chains to be sure that
we know where the possible future fight might be. It is an
imperative.
Ms. Tokuda. Absolutely.
And so, even when we take a look at this whole complex
issue of diversity, equity, and inclusion, when we really
understand the historical context and understand that needs to
be, you know, trained and educated upon our service men and
women, call it critical race theory, call it whatever you might
want, there are a lot of situations where it would behoove us
not to, you know, educate those individuals in our academies
about things like the occupation of Guam, things like the
illegal overthrow of Hawai'i by the United States, which is a
very sensitive subject in my home State, and one where we often
find a rub between the military and our local indigenous
community as well.
So many other issuances in which cultural competency,
strategic empathy, would be a great military strength for us
now.
So, you know, when we take a look at our recruitment
efforts, when it comes to making us the most effective fighting
machine here in the world, should we not be looking for
individuals that have the natural, immediate strategic empathy
towards the theater in which we are finding ourselves engaged?
Admiral Buck. Yes, ma'am.
Cultural competency is big improvement at our United States
Naval Academy since I graduated in the early eighties. Now that
it is so important for the United States military forces to
fight alongside our partners and our allies, cultural
competency is critical to building trust early on in a young
military person, whether they are enlisted or officer, of any
of the services.
So, that is a huge improvement in our Naval Academy with
our International Programs Office, what we teach in our history
classes, what we teach in our political science classes, to
have an appreciation of the past history of those that are our
partners and our allies, and fellow citizens.
Ms. Tokuda. Absolutely.
And more importantly, too, sometimes, you know, as I was
going on a CODEL [congressional delegation] with a number of
folks on this panel here, understanding how people think on the
ground, not just in the United States but throughout the
theater that we are engaging in, that is so important to have.
That being said, what we do know, and I know the data is
very dated, I think when I took a look at the ``Workplace
Equity Opportunity Survey,'' 2017 might have been the most
recent data that we were able to find. And there are some other
surveys, again somewhat dated, not fully inclusive of the
pandemic era right now. But even then, 42 percent of service
members of color turned down assignments or permanent change of
station because of fear of discrimination, or racism, in where
they might be assigned to.
We have seen a significant increase in anti-Asian hate in
our community. Even prior to the pandemic, one in four Asian
American service members reported racial or ethnic harassment
or discrimination. Fifty-seven percent of Active Duty family
respondents have been subject to racist comments or jokes.
I know that is not the responsibility of our service
academies, but you train the men and the women who will become
members of our Active Duty military. And so, we have to nip
this in the bud.
How are we making sure that we create a safe environment
for our communities of color to be able to recognize that they
not only have a role, they have a strategically important role
to play in the defense of our country?
General Gilland. Ma'am, with regards to ensuring that our
leaders of character have the cultural competencies, but I
think it is also, it is not just of the force that they are
leading, it is also the cultural awareness in that we, we look
to our allies and other nations to form a joint and combined
force in order to deter and, specifically as you discussed,
through the Pacific as we--it is a national strategic
imperative.
And I think it is important that as we continue to develop
the leaders of character they have the cultural awareness and
understanding, regardless of level of leadership, in order to
employ it.
Mr. Banks. The gentlewoman's time has expired.
Ms. Tokuda. Thank you both.
Mr. Banks. Representative Mills.
Mr. Mills. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Before I get started I would like to request unanimous
consent to enter into the record the Department of the Air
Force's ``Officer Source Commission Applicant Pool Goal.''
Mr. Banks. Without objection.
[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
on page 103.]
Mr. Mills. Thank you so much.
So, I wanted to note that in this it actually specifies the
diversity inclusion goals of the Department of the Air Force.
And was happy to find, in fact, that it is broken down into
individual categories, of which I noted that by gender it only
notes ``male'' and ``female.''
Does that identify the fact that for everyone who is a
witness here that there are only two genders?
General Clark. Sir, those are the, those are the two, those
are the genders that are recognized by the Office of
Personnel--is it OPM [U.S. Office of Personnel Management]? By
OPM.
Mr. Mills. So, would you agree then there is only two
genders?
General Clark. Sir, I would agree with that, yes.
Mr. Mills. Vice Admiral Buck.
Admiral Buck. Yes, I agree.
Mr. Mills. Lieutenant General.
General Clark. Sir, two genders identified by our DEERS
[Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System].
Mr. Mills. Thank you. And I would absolutely agree with
that.
Staying with Lieutenant General Clark, the Air Force
Academy recently encouraged cadets in diversity and inclusion
training to use gender neutral language, and refrain from using
things like ``mom'' and ``dad.''
Does the Air Force Academy still conduct these types of
diversity inclusion programs?
General Clark. Sir, we didn't actually tell cadets to
refrain from using ``mom'' and ``dad,'' we told cadets to
understand the context of the people that they are talking to
before they refer to them, their parents, their family, or even
their context.
And so, that was the crux of that training.
Of course, I would never tell anyone to not use the words
``mom'' and ``dad,'' especially----
Mr. Mills. Do you, Lieutenant General, refer to your mom
and dad as ``mom'' and ``dad''?
General Clark. I do. They are sitting right behind me. And
so, of course----
Mr. Mills. Well, hello, Mom and Dad. I am not sure where
you guys are.
General Clark. Yes, sir.
But we, we do allow the words ``mom'' and ``dad.'' But we
do want to help our cadets to understand, to understand the
people who they are leading, to know their context before they
engage with them. And I think that is a Leadership 101 sort of
idea.
Mr. Mills. Do you believe that cadets should use gender
neutral language when referring to their parents, as your
diversity and inclusion training recommends?
General Clark. Until they know what gender their parents
are, yes.
Mr. Mills. Vice Admiral Buck, in 2021 you signed and
endorsed the ``U.S. Naval Academy Diversity and Inclusion
Strategic Plan.'' This plan includes steps such as ``develop,
maintain a comprehensive cultural awareness and bias literacy
training framework.''
Regarding outlined areas of concern, such as admissions and
creating a metric, a metric that can measure and track
belongingness with a biannual survey for students in cadre, how
do we track belongingness?
Admiral Buck. Sir, since publishing that strategic
document, very, very little of it has been implemented. The one
thing, one aspect of it that we have implemented is creating
and improving our mentorship availability at the academy across
the brigade with all midshipmen.
But as we went back and looked at that document, we
realized that it requires much further and deeper review before
we implement any of the other aspects of that.
So, to your specific question about what metric there is, I
don't know. We have not created it, nor are we measuring it.
Mr. Mills. Okay. Thank you so much.
Lieutenant General Gilland, I have got a tremendous amount
of respect for your service and for what you have done, not
only with regiment but also with the unit in other areas. As
well as I have a good friend of mine who is a former teammate,
Major Casey Bell, who is an instructor out there. So, he told
me some good things about you when you were there previous to
becoming the Superintendent and Commandant.
I wanted to note that do you believe that meritocracy is
more substantial in creating leaders and new warfighters than
the ideas of DEI?
General Gilland. Sir, I believe that our force is made up
of a diverse nation, and that our leaders, based on their
promotions through a meritocracy, have to be aware of that
diverse force. And they have got to, and our leaders have got
to understand that in leading the men and women of our Armed
Forces that they are aware, there is an awareness, there is a
professional knowledge in order to be able to lead forces
competently, to be able to form disciplined cohesive teams, and
to be able to achieve the common goals of their respective
organization.
Mr. Mills. I don't disagree with that at all.
Would you say, though, that DEI would be a key factor in
something such as OTC [Officers' Training Corps]?
General Gilland. Could you repeat that, please, sir?
Mr. Mills. Would you consider----
Mr. Banks. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Mills [continuing]. Diversity to be a key factor into
OTC officer course that comes out of the unit? Or would it be
about meritocracy?
Mr. Banks. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Mills. I yield back.
Mr. Banks. Representative Alford.
Mr. Alford. Thank you, Chairman, I appreciate it.
I tell you what, this is another interesting but kind of
disturbing hearing. Charles Dickens wrote some years ago in the
``Tales of Two Cities,'' ``It was the best of times, it was the
worst of times, [it was] the age of wisdom, [it was] the age of
foolishness.'' He goes on to draw this contrast.
You know, I really think this is the tale of two countries
right now, two countries in which we live and in which I think
we are more divided than we have ever been since the Civil War.
Everyone on this subcommittee and this committee, you guys,
we have the same information, we have seen it, about the pacing
threat from Communist China. It is disturbing. And for some
reason we are stuck in this quagmire over how to boost
recruitment into our services so that we can be that deterrent
that we need to be.
You know, I truly believe that our strength as a nation
comes from our commonality. I know there are others who
disagree with that. Our love of country, our pride in our
republic; but we have got to figure this out.
We have got to get back to inspiring young people to be in
the military. We have got to give them a sense that they can be
all they can be. We have got to restore a sense of patriotism.
As you know, only 9 percent of current young people right
now have any interest in joining the military. And because of
this, the drag queen shows that came out that we are putting a
stop to, and other things, we have legacy families in my
district, fathers and grandfathers, mothers and grandmothers,
telling their grandchildren and children, ``Hey, don't get into
the military because it is not what it used to be.''
And so I am glad we are having this discussion. You know,
there are some, we went through the NDAA markup and there were
people complaining because we were talking about it. You know,
well, we have got to talk about it. We have got to dig into
this. We have got to remove this scab and heal what is wrong
with our country.
General Clark, you gave a list of considerations of things
for applicants for academy, Air Force Academy, potential
cadets. Does a student stand a better chance of being admitted
if they are of a certain demographic?
General Clark. Sir, I would say not a better chance. We
look at, like I mentioned, the whole-person concept. And
demographic is just one of those attributes that we look at for
a cadet to come into our academy once we know they are fully
qualified to be there.
So, I wouldn't say that any demographic has a better or a--
--
Mr. Alford. But it is a factor, is it not, race?
General Clark. It is a part of that whole-person look that
we take for each cadet or for each applicant.
Mr. Alford. Are there members of certain races who feel
like they are not welcome in the military right now for any
particular? Have you heard that personally from anyone who
said, I would love to sign up, but I don't feel like I am
welcome because I am Asian, or I am African American, or I am
whatever race?
General Clark. There, there could be. But it is our job to
make sure that they do feel welcome and included. We can't
afford right now to not bring in anybody who is willing,
qualified, and has a heart to serve to go in and support and
defend the country.
Mr. Alford. I get that, sir.
But to Lieutenant General Gilland or Vice Admiral Buck, do
you have any empirical evidence, anyone, any secondhand
knowledge of anybody saying, hey, I would have joined the Air
Force, I would have applied for my Congressman or woman to
appoint me to this academy, but I am of this race and I don't
feel welcome in the military? Have you heard that?
Admiral Buck. I have not, sir.
Mr. Alford. Lieutenant General.
General Gilland. Sir, I have not personally had any
encounter like that.
Mr. Alford. Lieutenant General Clark.
General Clark. Sir, I have not heard that personally.
Mr. Alford. Don't you think if it was a problem it would
have come up? I mean, that would be a big issue, would it not?
Does someone have empirical evidence to say, I don't feel
welcome in the military that is protecting our country against
the pacing threat from Communist China? And, yet, we haven't
heard that.
So, is this we are trying to find a solution that is not
really a problem? Please respond.
General Clark. Yes, sir.
What I would say is we do have people in the military when
they see things in our country or they experience things, we
want to make sure that, you talk about divisiveness outside of
our walls----
Mr. Banks. The gentleman's time has expired.
General Clark [continuing]. We want to make sure that when
they get to our academy that they feel fully, fully welcome and
included.
Mr. Alford. Thank you. I yield back.
Mr. Banks. Representative Ryan.
Mr. Ryan. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the
opportunity to join the subcommittee.
I want to be here for multiple reasons. One, as a proud
graduate of the United States Military Academy at West Point.
Two, to personally commend, and no offense to other great
leaders, to personally commend Superintendent Gilland.
West Point is in my district. I know we are here to talk
about a set of other issues, and I will ask those questions.
But the Superintendent, Sergeant Major, and the whole team have
led the academy through an incredibly difficult natural
disaster impeccably where we, we did lose one life in the
community. Thank God no cadets, or faculty, or staff, or
soldiers were hurt.
But I want to commend you for certainly something you
probably didn't expect to do, and another part of your
incredible record of service to the academy, to the cadets, and
to the community.
I also just want to say that I agree that, as my colleague
who I know had to leave said, the tone and tenor of these
discussions is disturbing. And as someone who served, as
someone who has tremendous pride in our military, in our
country, and our service academies, I think it is a--it is not
only disturbing, it is sad.
Because I know when I joined, and I can assume for everyone
else here, we joined to fight real wars at a moment of
tremendous risk across the globe, not culture wars. That is not
what our young men and women want to be a part of.
And I cannot for the life of me understand why we continue
to inject the very toxic, divisive topics, these culture war
topics, when what we hear over and over in the data, in the
conversations, in the surveys, our soldiers, sailors, airmen,
Marines, and guardians, they want us to focus on fighting and
preparing for real wars.
So, in the spirit of that I would ask, starting with
General Gilland, can you give us, I know we have talked about a
very narrow set of the curriculum and the preparation, can you
give us the holistic breadth over those 47 months what do
cadets--and would ask the others to join after--focus on, with
a particular focus on that critical thinking? Because that was
a common theme I heard from all of you.
General Gilland. Yes, sir. Thanks for that question, sir.
So, our curriculum, which is rooted in the Constitution of
the United States across our core courses, of which our cadets
swear an oath to the Constitution three times during their,
during their time at West Point. They swear an oath on R-Day
[Reception Day], Affirmation Day, which is the beginning of
their junior year, and then the Commissioning Oath on
graduation.
Our instructors, title 10 instructors, we have both
uniformed and civilian instructors, all of them are also, they
swear an oath to the Constitution also.
And, again, that, I say that and that our curriculum, that
common thread goes across our classes and the various
disciplines that we teach respectively there, which also
includes through our history, our military history, our law,
and our philosophy courses, and leadership courses, et cetera.
I think that that is where, as we, as we think about the
different topics that are discussed of which we don't shy away
from any controversial topics, we want to have civil discourse.
We want to have critical thinkers and develop critical thinkers
who are able to take on challenging topics, not only in
academia, but also in dealing with their soldiers and their
formations. Because our soldiers, our airmen, our guardians,
our seamen and Marines, sailors and Marines, are incredibly
intelligent.
They come from across the Nation. And they pose these
questions to our leaders, and particularly our junior leaders
that enter the force from the academies and the various
commissioning sources. And that is why it is important, sir.
Mr. Ryan. And just to build before you answer, Admiral
Buck, can you talk about the importance--and you can disagree
as well--of being uncomfortable as a junior military leader, to
have to be in a situation where you are uncomfortable and lead
your troops in that situation?
Admiral Buck. Throughout all of our professional training
and our summer training, I think at all three of our service
academies we are teaching our cadets and our midshipmen how to
become comfortable being uncomfortable, and living in
environments that may have ambiguity, or uncertainty, or chaos,
or fog. They have got to learn to still be able to comprehend
and critically think and decide in those kinds of environments.
Getting back to your question about the content of our
curriculum, we are a very, very STEM-heavy school. A typical
midshipman will graduate anywhere from a hundred--with 140 to
145 credit hours. That differs from a civilian institution
which is down in the 120s. And 90 of those credit hours are
STEM-related because of the weapon----
Mr. Banks. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Ryan. Thank you, Admiral.
Mr. Banks. I yield myself 5 minutes for questions. But I
will begin by yielding to Representative Waltz.
Mr. Waltz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I just wanted to continue on that last line of questioning
before I was interrupted. And I will state again, we want equal
opportunity for every single American. Equal opportunity, for
every single American to serve.
The concern of this committee is that we have political
pressure to tip the scales from a meritocracy in any way,
shape, or form based on some other ethnic or race factor. And
that is what we want to be sure isn't happening.
So, I will ask you, each of you, there are--we talked about
the whole candidate scores--is there any instance to where you
have allowed the selection, the accession of a lower scoring
candidate, either in your Superintendent nomination category or
your additional appointee candidates, over someone with a
higher whole-candidate score based on meeting your diversity
goals?
Admiral Buck. No, sir. Not at the United States Naval
Academy.
General Gilland. No, sir. We look at multiple
considerations.
Mr. Waltz. But you do look at race as part of that whole
candidate?
General Gilland. Sir, as we talked about considerations
across the admissions process, which also includes scholars,
leaders, athletes, the respective--and that is the goals for
talent that we are, we are striving for.
Mr. Waltz. Is race part of that whole candidate?
General Gilland. Race is not part of the whole-candidate
score, sir.
Mr. Waltz. Okay, thank you.
General Clark.
General Clark. That would be no, sir, for me as well.
Mr. Waltz. You have never elevated someone that may have a
lower whole-candidate score because of their ethnic background?
General Clark. I have not.
Mr. Waltz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield.
Mr. Banks. I reclaim my time.
Let me first ask a simple question to each of you.
If the language that passed that a majority of the House of
Representatives voted for last week to apply the same standards
of the Supreme Court decision on the military academies as on
the rest of colleges and universities, how much of a difference
would it make at West Point?
General Gilland. Chairman Banks, with the Department of the
Army and OSD [Office of the Secretary of Defense], we are still
assessing the Supreme Court ruling.
Mr. Banks. But would it make a, would it make a big
decision--would it make a big difference if you have to apply
the same rules?
General Gilland. Sir, we are assessing it. We will have to
come back to you once the assessment is complete.
Mr. Banks. What do you think as you assess it? I mean, I
think you owe it to the committee to tell us how much, what do
you think the difference would be?
General Gilland. I owe it to you to prevent--to present
facts, sir. I will wait till the assessment is complete.
Mr. Banks. Admiral Buck.
Admiral Buck. I believe the diversity that we enjoy at the
United States Naval Academy is because of the huge effort that
we make and that you all participate with us in creating an
applicant pool from the country. And I believe the further and
the more effort that we do in our outreach to teach everybody
in this country what the U.S. Naval Academy is and what that
opportunity might be, I think it kind of naturally drives a
diverse brigade of midshipmen.
In the last 20 years, the female population at the Naval
Academy has, has doubled. The racial diversity at the Naval
Academy over the last 10 to 15 years has increased.
I believe that is a tribute to how hard we are working to
create an applicant pool for you all to consider to nominate.
Mr. Banks. I think that hits on a really important
question. If Congress nominates candidates to the academies,
why, why do we have to take race into consideration at all, if
that is the process that we are using?
Admiral Buck. It is one aspect of diversity that we have
talked about. But it is one of many, many different aspects of
diversity. And all aspects of diversity, I think, are powerful
and helpful to making a cohesive team.
Mr. Banks. General Clark, how much of a difference do you
think it would make if the Supreme Court decision did apply to
the Air Force Academy? Do you think it would make a big
difference at all?
General Clark. Well, sir, I know, again as General Gilland
mentioned, we are assessing that right now and what kind of a
difference that would make.
Mr. Banks. Well, what do you think? I mean, you are the
leader there, do you think it would make a big difference or
not?
General Clark. I am not as familiar with every meaning of
we are not included in the scope of this decision and exactly
what that means. So, I, I don't want to get out in front of
that until we are able to really analyze this.
Mr. Banks. General Gilland, at West Point is there a
difference between preference and quotas?
And do you apply one or the other in how you apply race as
a factor?
General Gilland. Sir, we don't, we don't have quotas at the
United States Military Academy.
Mr. Banks. Preference?
General Gilland. We have goals to meet, as I stated, with
regards to leader, leader goals. So, categories of young men
and women, regardless of their backgrounds, our leaders, fall
into a leadership category, a scholar category, an athlete
category.
Mr. Banks. My time has expired.
I yield to Ranking Member Kim.
Mr. Kim. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, again, for the three of you to come on out here.
I wanted to just read you a couple of two sentences here.
This was a brief that 35 former military leaders presented to
the Supreme Court talking about diversity in our military
academies and their education.
They said, ``The importance of maintaining a diverse,
highly qualified officer corps has been beyond legitimate
dispute for decades.''
And they go on to say, ``Units that are diverse across all
levels are more cohesive, collaborative, and effective.''
Lieutenant General Gilland, I wanted to get your just
reaction to that. Would you agree with those sentences there?
General Gilland. I agree that we are responsible for
building fit, cohesive, disciplined organizations. Those
organizations are drawn from our Nation, which is a diverse
nation.
Mr. Kim. Thank you.
General Gilland. And our leaders have to, have to be able
to lead those forces.
Mr. Kim. Vice Admiral, your thoughts?
Admiral Buck. I concur with those, those exact thoughts,
sir.
Mr. Kim. Lieutenant General.
General Clark. I agree, sir. And I believe we need to pull
talent from every corner of our society, every demographic, and
every congressional district. So, I think it is important.
Mr. Kim. I think that is something that we need to kind of
focus in on here, that value of diversity.
This is something when that I had the great honor to be
able to go out earlier this week to the Naval Academy and talk
to the midshipmen there. The sense that, you know, this is not
just some ordinary educational institution, this is one that is
there to develop leaders. And there is this understanding that
those that are there are part of something bigger than all of
us.
And I guess the question is, if we establish that value of
diversity then the question is, well, how are we calibrating?
Are we calibrating correctly? Are we doing it too much, too
little?
And at least with the Naval Academy, when I talked with
some of the midshipmen and the recent graduates, not a single
one of them thought that, that any type of diversity training,
or education, or curriculum was over burdensome. In fact, they
struggled to think through any significant level of mandatory
requirements along that level. They said it was just a handful
of hours, at most, that they could think about it in a given
year.
So, I guess, Lieutenant General, starting with you, do you
think your academy's admissions, and also the curriculum, is
overly focused on race and diversity?
General Gilland. No, sir.
Mr. Kim. Vice Admiral.
Admiral Buck. No, sir.
Mr. Kim. Lieutenant General.
General Clark. And, sir, I will say in a 4-year academy
education one of our cadets could expect to get 16 hours of
diversity, equity, and inclusion training. They would get over
a thousand hours, at a minimum, in warfighter training.
So, I don't think we are overtraining in that area.
Mr. Kim. So, you said 16 hours across all 4 years?
General Clark. All 4 years. Yes, sir.
Mr. Kim. Now, that is roughly what I would--I heard from
some of the midshipmen as well.
So, you know, so we are thinking through this. The value of
diversity that we have talked and we agree upon, the sense are
we calibrating, frankly, is it too much?
And if we are saying, you know, at least, at least some of
us are saying that that is not the case.
Now, the third point in the question is, is the diversity
considerations and the teaching of different types of
curriculum, is that weakening our development of leaders for
this country, the mission of your organization?
So, I guess I just wanted to ask down the row one last time
here, current admissions efforts, the whole-of-person efforts
that you are dealing with, the academic freedom to teach cadets
and midshipmen how to think, not what to think, is that
producing lesser quality leaders than in past years?
Lieutenant General.
General Gilland. Sir, in reference to the previous question
also, we don't conduct diversity training at the military
academy, we conduct equal opportunity training.
Mr. Kim. Uh-huh.
General Gilland. So, I just want to clarify that.
Mr. Kim. Yeah, that, that is helpful. Yes.
General Gilland. Now, with regards to the curriculum that
goes back to teaching how to think, not what to think, and
critical thinking skills, and how the environment is complex.
And for our young leaders going out into the force, they have
got to be able to deal with all kinds of different----
Mr. Kim. Yes.
General Gilland [continuing]. Situations, complexity,
problem sets that they may not have been exposed to.
And so, what do they draw upon in order to solve those
problem sets? They draw upon the skills, the knowledge, the
tools that we have educated and enabled them with in order to
solve those problems, to enable, really, to build a more
cohesive, disciplined force that is, that is working towards
that common goal that they have respectively.
Mr. Kim. Great. Thank you. I couldn't have said it better.
Vice Admiral, your thoughts?
Admiral Buck. Sir, our top two customers of the product
that we produce at the Naval Academy, which are leaders of
character for the United States Navy and the Marine Corps, are
the citizens of the United States, their military, their Navy,
and their Marine Corps that will defend this country, and then,
more specifically, the fleet.
So, the feedback I get from the fleet, which really I am
attuned to, says that the product that we are producing right
now is very solid, very good, and we are accomplishing our
mission.
Mr. Kim. Thank you.
I yield back.
Mr. Banks. The gentleman's time has expired.
We would like turn to a quick second round for members who
are remaining. And I will begin. I yield myself 5 minutes.
On the screen there will be a slide from West Point's 2017
Report to its Board of Visitors, which I would like to enter
into the record.
[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
on page 104.]
Mr. Banks. It shows that the academy used race-based class
composition goals in its admissions process for several years
General, did the academy also use race-based class
composition goals for the Class of 2027 which just started a
few weeks ago?
General Gilland. Sir, we have class composition goals. If
we don't meet those goals, we don't meet them.
Mr. Banks. So, but you did, you did have those goals for
the Class of 2027?
General Gilland. As we have goal--we have class composition
goals, as I stated, for leaders, for scholars, for athletes. We
have composition goals----
Mr. Banks. Race-based?
General Gilland. I have composition goals for our, for men
and women, for women, and our respective minorities.
Mr. Banks. So, race-based composition goals for the Class
of 2027? Simple question.
General Gilland. We have goals. We have, we have
composition goals, sir.
Mr. Banks. Are you meeting those goals?
General Gilland. In some instances we are, in some we are
not.
Mr. Banks. How have those goals changed over the last few
years that you have been at West Point?
General Gilland. Sir, as my colleagues indicated earlier, I
mean we have seen an increase in women significantly throughout
the decades. As we identify talent across our Nation----
Mr. Banks. Are you meeting your race-based composition
goals at West Point?
General Gilland. This year we did not in some categories.
Mr. Banks. How far off from that goal were you?
General Gilland. We were, we were under a percent or two.
We are talking in terms of tens of people.
Mr. Banks. Okay. Vice Admiral Buck, does the Naval Academy
have race-based composition goals like, like these goals at
West Point?
Admiral Buck. Sir, we do not have race-based composition
goals at the academy. But we also have the most diverse brigade
of midshipmen we have ever had in our history.
And I will harken back to tell you I believe that is from
our ground game, and our effort, and our outreach to get across
this country to let everybody know in this country who we are,
what we stand for, and what opportunity it would be. And,
therefore, naturally we have enjoyed applications from a very
diverse group of people in this country.
Mr. Banks. General Clark, can you tell us about race-based
composition goals at the Air Force Academy?
General Clark. The goals that we have are application
goals. And we have specific areas of the country, demographics
that we strive to bring in as applicants.
Last year we had 10,200 applicants. And we did have goals
for that, which would then allow us to pull the best talent out
of all of our applicants and allow you the opportunity, as a
body, to nominate them to our academy.
Mr. Banks. Can you tell us more about how those goals are
established?
General Clark. They are established----
Mr. Banks. Do you establish them yourself or do you have a
committee that establishes them? Where do they come from?
General Clark. We establish them based on the demographics
in our Air Force. And they are only applicant goals, not
necessarily the goals of the cadets that come in. It is a
matter of----
Mr. Banks. Yeah. And tell us more about the--what goes into
establishing a goal? There has to be, there has got to be a
process.
General Clark. What we look at, what our demographics are
in the Air Force writ large.
We also look at our Nation's demographics so that we can
ensure that we are reaching every community to pull that
talent. And if we see that our applicant goals are lower in an
area, we know whether it is geographic or demographic.
Mr. Banks. Is there an established metric that you could
share with the committee of where that goal comes from?
General Clark. The goal--we, we establish the goals based
on, again, our population of our Air Force and Space Force.
Mr. Banks. Very specifically----
General Clark. And the----
Mr. Banks. Very specifically based on the population of the
Air Force?
General Clark. That is used in determining the goals. The
population of the Air Force is used in determining the goals.
Mr. Banks. Let's go to West Point. I mean is there a
committee? Is there a science behind it or do you just pull the
goals out of thin air?
General Gilland. No, sir. Those goals are established based
on the composition of our Army officer corps. That is the basis
for it.
Mr. Banks. So, it is very specific metric that you use to
determine the goals?
General Gilland. As our Army looks at the Army officer
corps and the composition of it, our grad--we would like our
graduating classes to look similar to the Army officer corps
that exists as it currently is as each graduating class enters
into the, into the operational force.
Mr. Banks. I will yield 5 minutes to Ranking Member Kim.
Mr. Kim. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I have just a couple questions here.
Vice Admiral Buck, you talked about that whole-person
approach. And you talked to me about that before when I came on
out to your academy. And you talked about it in terms of
objective and subjectives, the mixture of different types of
factors in there.
I guess the question I have to you is, is it possible to
identify the best potential leaders for leading our military
force in this country through only test scores and objective
factors? Or do you feel like you would be missing something
there?
Admiral Buck. I feel like we would be missing something.
Both the objective factors and the subjective factors are
really, really important. That, it kind of defines what that
whole-person assessment, every aspect----
Mr. Kim. Yeah.
Admiral Buck [continuing]. Of that person we want to
assess.
Not all of that is done objectively. Some of it you have to
hear what other people think of that individual as a citizen,
as a human being, their character, which is really, really
important to be a military leader is a man or a woman of good
solid character.
So, a teacher's assessment from school, an English teacher,
a math teacher, they talk about their performance in English
and math. But quite often they also talk about that
individual's character, what kind of human being they are.
We also get a subjective assessment from what we call our
``Blue and Gold Officers.'' It is a cadre of volunteer former
alumni in most cases that also do interviews with our
candidates and tell us what type of individual they think they
are. That is a subjective measure.
Also, we look at their background. Are they the first in
their families to go to college? Are they first-generation
Americans? Have they overcome some very unusual adversity in
their life which might give us an indication of their
resilience? Have they--are they the son or daughter of a
diplomat and served abroad in many other countries that might
bring that type of neat cultural competency experience?
So, those are subjective factors that are really, really
important to allow us to add to the assessment that the
objectivity also gives us.
Mr. Kim. Thank you. That is very helpful to just further
tease that out.
And, Lieutenant General, I want to bring you into this
conversation because you also talked about that whole-person
approach.
And if you don't mind, I would like to just think about
this as not just, you know, not just the applicant that you are
trying to develop, to identify here, you are trying to develop
leaders to be leading this country. So, in the same way I would
say when it comes to leadership is there some objective
formula, or objective standard by which you can determine who
is a good leader or a bad leader?
Or do you feel like there needs to be some subjectivity in
that as well?
General Clark. Sir, I absolutely feel there needs to be
subjectivity. That is the art of pulling in the right people,
to look at their, the whole of their life experience, to see
how they performed in different situations so that we can
better understand many of the things that Admiral Buck just
talked about, but really what we can expect of them and their
development at the Air Force Academy.
Mr. Kim. I thank you for that.
And over the course of just listening to, what, the last
hour 40 of this, you know, I just feel like we are trying to
put at odds concepts that don't have to be mutually exclusive.
You know, like that we can talk about objectivity,
subjectivity, recognizing that there is an ability for us to
package that, and look through that, and use our best judgment
in that capacity.
And in the same way, I feel like we are constantly feeling
like meritocracy and diversity are at odds with one another.
Again, two concepts that I feel like we keep putting against
each other over the course of the time that we have been in
this room.
But it doesn't have to be the case that pursuing diversity,
pursuing that effort to be reflective of the country doesn't
mean that we are watering down leadership, as you pointed out
in the previous point.
I would just like to end with General Gilland. You--I felt
like your last points when we were having the previous question
line just really stuck in my mind. And I just feel like so much
about that is about how do we prepare, how do we develop
leadership?
And part of that, I think, what I took away is, you know,
we have to prepare them for everything. Is that right? And you
are preparing them for everything, not just physically but also
mentally, intellectually.
Like, you would want them to not encounter a new idea or a
new school of thought out in command if you have an ability to
kind of prepare them for that ahead of time.
Am I correct? Is that some of what you were getting at?
General Gilland. Yes, sir. I think it is about having the,
the skills and the tools. And that is through development.
I think that our cadets at West Point are immersed in
character development and leadership. I would submit that that
is what their degree is in. Because every single day they are
exposed to character development and leadership in order to be
able to, at the conclusion of 47 months, graduate and lead
young men and women in our Army specifically.
And our vision, as the preeminent leadership institution in
the world, what is key to that is that it is about developing
leaders over the course of that 47 months. They don't
necessarily come in as defined as such. We provide those skills
and capabilities.
Mr. Kim. Thank you.
I yield back.
Mr. Banks. Representative Gaetz.
Mr. Gaetz. Let's put the slide show back up that we were
discussing earlier. This is the Air Force Academy instructing
students on how to use inclusive language.
We had Secretary Kendall here. And when we got into the
whole mom and dad thing, Secretary Kendall said, yeah, we
probably aren't going to tell students they can't say ``mom''
and ``dad''; that was inartful.
So, if there are other things here that are inartful that
you want to disclaim, that is a totally reasonable thing for a
person to do.
So, I want to start with this contention that to be
inclusive, cadets would have to not use the term
``colorblind,'' or say, ``we're all just people.''
Is there something wrong with aspiring to be colorblind in
the United States military, and particularly the Air Force
Academy?
General Clark. Sir, I think it depends on how you use, how
a person uses that term in context. I think that most people if
you are of a different race or a different color, that you
don't want to be--you want to be seen for who you are. You
don't want someone to look at you and not see, in my case, a
Black man, because that is who I am. I don't want you to be
blind to that.
But I want a person to accept that, and to understand that,
and to include me as if they would include any other person
that might be of a different color.
Mr. Gaetz. Well, we, as a country, we were in many ways
educated on the concept of colorblindness through the civil
rights movement. And in Dr. King's many remarks he would talk
about the virtue of judging one another not by the color of our
skin, not you as a Black man, me as a White man, but by the
content of our character.
Do you worry that the Air Force's critique of
colorblindness could be viewed as a critique of the very values
that undergird the civil rights movement?
General Clark. I don't think so. In my interpretation of
Dr. King's words he is not saying don't recognize the color of
a person, he is saying once you recognize it, don't judge them
by that color.
Mr. Gaetz. Didn't Dr. King explicitly call for
colorblindness?
General Clark. I think he called for he said, don't, don't
judge people by--and that is what I meant----
Mr. Gaetz. But colorblindness, I want to use, because we
are talking about specific terms and language.
General Clark. Right.
Mr. Gaetz. Dr. King did explicitly call for colorblindness,
right?
General Clark. He may have. I am not sure of when he did
that.
Mr. Gaetz. Yeah. I am just starting to think maybe, maybe
instead of, like, teaching that we shouldn't say ``boyfriend''
or ``girlfriend,'' or ``mom,'' or ``dad,'' or whatever, maybe
we should actually get back to the core of the values of the
civil rights movement. Because we learned about you would be
able to answer these questions more thoroughly if maybe we had
a greater connection to the thoughts of Dr. King and maybe a
little less Ibram X. Kendi.
What about the statement ``we're all just people''? What is
offensive about that?
General Clark. It is not that it is offensive, sir. My
first----
Mr. Gaetz. What is non-inclusive? Because this is saying
``not,'' underlined, ``not we're all just people.'' So, why is
that a not? I thought ``we're all just people,'' that sounds
inclusive to me.
General Clark. In the context that this slide was
presented, what the folks who presented it were saying was
recognize people for who they are, that we don't always all
look alike, that we are not always of the same----
Mr. Gaetz. But why do the words ``we're all just people''
serve as an affront to that concept?
General Clark. Well, I think, I think the idea is that we
are all, we should all be treated as equals. We should all be
treated as equal.
Mr. Gaetz. But what about ``we're all just people''? But I
have to get you back to the words on----
General Clark. Okay.
Mr. Gaetz [continuing]. On your slide here.
General Clark. Yes, sir.
Mr. Gaetz. So, the words on your slide say, ``we're all
just people.'' And you say that is a bad thing because we have
to say that we are all equal. Does that seem sort of circular
to you?
General Clark. Well, I think in the context that it was
presented, the slide is a, is a bit out of context when you
can't present it in the way that it was presented to the
committee.
Mr. Gaetz. I mean, I have gone through two of them. I am
providing as much context as I, as I can.
Are cadets punished if they talk about coloblindness in a
positive way?
General Clark. Absolutely not.
Mr. Gaetz. Are they punished if they say ``boyfriend'' or
``girlfriend'' rather than ``partner''?
General Clark. Absolutely not.
Mr. Gaetz. Are they punished if they say ``the disabled''
as opposed to ``people with disabilities''?
General Clark. They are not.
Mr. Gaetz. Are they punished if they say ``transgenders''
instead of ``transgender people or service members''?
General Clark. They are not.
Mr. Gaetz. Are they punished if they say ``mom'' or ``dad''
instead of ``parents,'' ``caregivers,'' or ``guardians''?
General Clark. They are not.
Mr. Gaetz. Okay, then, so why are we teaching it?
General Clark. What we are teaching is to understand a
person's context, to understand how to talk to people within
their context so as not to offend until you get to know your
people. And that is how we build effective training.
Mr. Gaetz. But what I think you have to realize is that
when you critique colorblindness, and when you critique
statements like ``we're all just people,'' that is the divisive
activity, that in the name of diversity, equity, and inclusion
we see some of the most divisive rhetoric.
I see my time has expired. I yield back.
Mr. Banks. Representative Mills.
Mr. Mills. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to go back to something that you were talking about
just a moment ago where you were explaining about your slide on
goals. And it was noted by Lieutenant General Gilland as well
as Lieutenant General Clark that they base it on the corps or
on the demographics of the United States.
But I also note that there is an office in the United
States Military Academy of Diversity, Inclusion, Equal
Opportunity Committee. So, if it is judged off of the corps,
could you tell me what makes two things: an individual qualify
for this committee; and what recommendations does that
committee make?
General Gilland. Sir, I have a Office of Diversity,
Inclusion, Equity, and Equal Opportunity. That, that office is
a, is a tool. It is a recommending body to me, as it provides
information to me across our academy which also, which is not
just inclusive of the Corps of Cadets, it is inclusive of our
entire population that exists at West Point.
That office, again, is a body that provides me advice,
recommendations as we look at different aspects of the
candidate.
Mr. Mills. Would some of those recommendations be like the
goals that we were--that the chairman was just talking about
earlier?
General Gilland. That office does not provide the
recommendations on goals with regards to our class composition.
Mr. Mills. It doesn't say we have fewer of this race or
gender, or more of this race or gender? It doesn't plug into
any recommendations whatsoever of where we are at on the goals?
General Gilland. Sir, when we look at that, that is derived
from our admissions. And, again, and with regards to the
establishment of the composition goals, that is based off of
the Army officer corps.
Mr. Mills. Okay.
General Gilland. As we, it is established on a yearly
basis.
Mr. Mills. Moving on, I always go back to this same
question. It seems to be a very difficult question for lot of
our, our military.
What is the difference between equity and equality?
General Gilland. Sir, I think as we think of equity, equity
is that everybody has the same opportunities. They are able to
aspire to achieve the goals that they have laid out for
themselves, and that there are no hindrances or barriers to
achieve those respective goals.
Mr. Mills. And what about equality?
General Gilland. So, as we have equal opportunity offices,
as we, as directed by the Army and Department of Defense, our
equal opportunities, again, through which whether it is through
our military occupational specialties, branches, whatever line
of work or profession that they are in, the equal opportunity
provides that, that they have those--all individuals
respectively are able to aspire, they are able to be promoted
without any hindrances or barriers respectively.
Mr. Mills. See, that sounds like the exact same definition,
similarly just with different way of saying it as equity. And
my definition and understanding based on DEI and what its
metric was and what was utilized is that equality is exactly
what you said, it is about equal opportunity. It doesn't define
you by race, gender, your socioeconomic status, things like
this.
But equity was more based on the ideas of equal outcome.
You know, it wasn't a metrics-based system that the diversity,
equity, inclusion was going into.
And I would argue that part of our recruitment deficit that
we see in the United States military, we are at about 25,000
short right now on our recruitment efforts, not to mention the
8,600 which were unconstitutionally purged out with the vaccine
mandates, is because we have prioritized, a little bit too much
in my opinion, that diversity, equity, inclusion is important
as opposed to what we should be focused on, which is increased
lethality, readiness, and being properly equipped, which was
the way it was when I was in the military.
I spent between my military and government time over 7
years of my life in Iraq, over 3 years of my life in
Afghanistan, Kosovo, Pakistan. Was blown up twice in 2006 in
Baghdad. I didn't see anything wrong with saying colorblind or
anything like that because everyone who was on my team we bled
green.
And I am seeing where there is just such a focus and/or a
priority which is really hurting our military recruitment
efforts because people think that it is about us being able to
out-pronoun our enemies as opposed to be able to meet the
challenges on the battlefields.
I wish that we would get back to the ``Be All You Can Be''
Army that we were and not try and go ahead and start driving a
political agenda. Allow our military to serve our government,
our country, not an agenda.
With that I yield back.
Mr. Banks. Rep. Ryan.
Mr. Ryan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to remind the group that is actually the motto
of the Army, number one. Correct.
So, mission accomplished.
For each of our esteemed leaders, could you each tell us
how many years you have led as military officers in your
respective service?
General Gilland. Sir, I have been in the service for over
33 years.
Mr. Ryan. Thank you, sir.
Admiral Buck. Sir, in the coming weeks I will conclude 44
years in uniform, 4 years as a midshipman and 40 years as a
commissioned naval officer.
Mr. Ryan. Thank you, sir.
General Clark. And, sir, I have been an Active Duty officer
for 37 and a half years, not counting my 4 years as a cadet as
the Air Force Academy.
Mr. Ryan. Thank you, sir.
And rough estimate, how many of your various soldiers,
sailors, airmen roughly do you think you have led and commanded
over those years? Just a rough estimate.
Sorry to put you on the spot.
General Gilland. Tens of thousands, sir.
Admiral Buck. Likewise, tens of thousands.
General Clark. Same, sir.
Mr. Ryan. Thank you.
And I ask that question so that the American people and my
colleagues understand--who have all left--understand and
respect the combined wisdom, military leadership, and your
commitment and service to the country. And, of course, the
proper roles of this democratic, small ``d'' democratic, back
and forth is important.
But I think it is important that we recognize the system we
have put in place to appoint Superintendents and leaders with
tremendous leadership experience, and dedication and
commitment, and that all of that has come into informing the
processes, and systems, and the thoughtfulness that has gone
into it.
And I just wanted to emphasize that.
And most importantly, Admiral Buck, 44 years,
congratulations and particular recognition for that tremendous
amount of service.
Second question. I have heard a really concerning theme and
trajectory to some of these conversations where there is some
risk of deciding that there are certain qualifications or
qualities which you have outlined in your recruitment and
admissions goals, that because a few people don't like them we
may get rid of them.
So, this may seem a little bit on the nose. But how would
you feel if we were to decide, for example, that only certain
States could admit applicants to your academies?
What impact would that have on the readiness of our, of our
force in your academy to fight the future wars?
General Gilland. Sir, again, our force is made up of the
entire nation. Our people come from all over the world. And the
academies, as a commissioning source, are just one, one source
of officers that go into the operational force.
And as such, the diverse nature of the force as it is, by
coming from across the United States and around the world, we
have got to be aware of it, we recognize it, and we have got to
be able to lead it. And that is, that is critical when we think
about our professional competencies.
Admiral Buck. Sir, we would lose the geographic diversity
that that would limit us to. And from that geographic diversity
it is the lived experience. And in many places some people live
urban, some people live rural. We value the lived experience of
every one of our applicants.
So, it would be limiting and not as healthy as we would
like to have.
Mr. Ryan. Thank you.
General Clark. And, sir, we would also miss out on a lot of
talent because talent is spread across our country, every
community, every demographic. And we have to put our tentacles
everywhere that we can to pull the absolute best that America
has to offer into our academies and to eventually serve in our
Armed Forces.
Mr. Ryan. So, on that point, do you all agree generally,
and I know the slide that was put up was from a few years ago,
but I want to just give you the chance to address the idea that
having goals for various broad sets of diversity--athletes,
scholars, leaders, geographic and otherwise--is important to
ensuring we get that full breadth of the Nation, of all that it
has to offer.
General Gilland. Yes, sir, I agree.
Admiral Buck. I agree with Lieutenant General Clark's
previous answer is we have a goal of applicants. And as I have
suggested before in some of my other answers, the more
applicants, the better selectivity that we will enjoy from all
around the country.
General Clark. I agree, sir.
Mr. Ryan. Thank you.
And in the last 8 seconds, just want to again thank you all
for being here and for your tremendous leadership for our
country.
I yield back.
Mr. Banks. Thank you.
I want to thank all of the members for participating today.
I want to enter the entire ``2017 Annual Report of the
United States Military Academy Board of Visitors,'' dated
December 20, 2017, into the record.
Without objection, so ordered.
[The information referred to is retained in the committee
files and can be viewed upon request.]
Mr. Banks. In closing, I am somewhat reassured by Admiral
Buck's agreement that the Supreme Court decision would have
little if no impact on the makeup on our academies if it was
ruled to include the military academies. And that is why
including race is inappropriate and unnecessary.
We must do everything that we can to preserve the
meritocracy of our military.
But I still urge you as leaders of these academies to
consider that much of the DEI and inclusivity training not only
doesn't work to decrease bias, but it is actually the
weaponization of one ideological position, identity over all
else.
And as Superintendents, I am trusting you to ensure that
the material that we teach our future leaders will permit them
to lead troops in battle and protect our national security. And
I am not sure that right now what we are teaching our cadets
and mids always, always does that.
But I do want to thank all of our witnesses again for
providing your testimony this afternoon.
There being no further business, the subcommittee stands
adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:58 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I X
July 19, 2023
=======================================================================
PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
July 19, 2023
=======================================================================
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
=======================================================================
DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
July 19, 2023
=======================================================================
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
=======================================================================
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING
July 19, 2023
=======================================================================
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MS. HOULAHAN
Ms. Houlahan. Given increased reports of sexual assaults and
harassment at the military academies, how are your respective
institutions investigating sexual assault and harassment cases and have
you implemented any recent changes in light of these findings?
General Gilland. Anyone who makes a report of sexual harassment or
sexual assault is informed of his/her rights as a victim, including the
options available to them for the investigation of their case. For
formal cases of sexual harassment, the United States Military Academy
(USMA) abides by Army Directive (AD) 2022-13, Reforms to Counter Sexual
Harassment/Sexual Assault in the Army. In accordance with AD 2022-13,
paragraph 5.a., if sufficient information exists to permit the
initiation of an investigation, commanders appoint investigating
officers (IOs) from outside of the subjects' assigned brigade-sized
element to conduct sexual harassment complaint investigations under
Army Regulation (AR) 600-20, chapter 7. For unrestricted reports of
sexual assault, the criminal investigative division (CID) is notified
of the report. The Criminal Investigative Division investigates the
report of a sexual assault.
In addition, the CATCH Program gives adult sexual assault victims
who filed Restricted Reports, certain Unrestricted Reports (where the
name of the suspect is not reported to law enforcement or uncovered by
law enforcement), or no report an opportunity to anonymously submit
suspect information to help the DOD identify serial offenders.
Individuals providing information to the CATCH program do so
confidentially. If their entry ``matches'' another entry or information
in an existing investigation, the adult sexual assault victim will be
notified and reminded of their option to participate in the
investigation of the alleged offender. The victim's participation in
the CATCH Program is voluntary and the victim's name is not provided to
law enforcement without the victim's explicit permission. The victim
may decline to participate in the process at any point, even after
being notified that there was a potential match. Because these reports
are investigated, USMA has not implemented further changes with respect
to investigation.
Ms. Houlahan. What measures are you taking to ensure those who
report assaults at the academies are protected from retaliation?
General Gilland. Anyone who makes a report of sexual harassment or
sexual assault is informed of their rights as a victim, including the
right to be protected from retaliation. For those who file an
unrestricted report of sexual assault, the Chain of Command is notified
of the report and close contact is kept between the Sexual Assault
Response Coordinator (SARC), the victim's Tactical Officer (TAC), and
the victim to ensure the victim has the support they require. This
includes ensuring that the victim is doing well emotionally and
physically, which includes confirming that they are not facing any form
of retaliation.
Ms. Houlahan. Given women with nominations are consistently
admitted at lower rates despite high academic performance, could you
explain West Point's admissions process and how gender is incorporated
when reviewing applications?
General Gilland. West Point utilizes the whole candidate process
when building an incoming class. This process does not factor in a
candidate's gender. The whole candidate process uses the following
metrics when evaluating candidates for admission:
a. Academics--60% (Standardized test scores and high school GPA)
b. Leadership--30% (extra-curricular activities, varsity athletic
participation, community activities, church activities, school official
evaluations--math, English, lab science, and physical education)
c. Physical--10% (Candidate Fitness Assessment)
i. Kneeling Basketball Throw
ii. Pull-ups (males) Flexed-Arm Hang (Females)--Females also
have the option to execute pull-ups.
iii. 40-yard Shuttle Run
iv. Crunches
v. Push-ups
vi. 1-Mile Run
Prior to being considered for an Offer of Appointment to the United
States Military Academy, each candidate must complete the West Point
application (known as the Candidate Kit). Obtain a nomination (either
Congressional or Service-Connected), be deemed medically qualified by
the Department of Defense Medical Examination Review Board (DODMERB)
and pass the Candidate Fitness Examination (CFA). Once a candidate is
complete, his/her file enters the qualification process. During this
phase, the file is reviewed by three different individuals. The first
individual to review the file is the responsible admissions officer.
The second individual to review the file is a member of the Admissions
Committee who does reside within the Directorate of Admissions.
Currently there are sixteen voting members from across the Academy on
the Admissions Committee (the Directorate of Admissions only has one
voting member, the Director). The third and final review of the file is
conducted by another Admissions Officer from within the Directorate of
Admissions.
If there is any discrepancy between qualifiers the file is brought
to the full Admissions Committee for discussion and vote. Once a
candidate's file is fully qualified, it will go to the Director of
Admissions for either slating for an Offer of Admission, or placement
on our waiting list. This determination is based on the competitiveness
of the candidate within their Nomination Source (either Congressional
or Service-connected). The key piece is that every candidate who is
offered admission to the United States Military Academy must be deemed
qualified through this process.
Over the last five years, the percentage of fully qualified females
who were offered admission to West Point has been consistent with or
higher than the percentage of fully qualified males.
Over the same period, we have seen the gap between the percentage
of nominated male and female candidates whose files were fully
qualified for admission grow from .6 for the Class of 2023, to 11.8 for
the Class of 2027.
This gap can be attributed to several factors to include voluntary
withdrawal of applications, closure of applications due to lack of
progress or competitiveness, medical disqualification, or failure to
attain a passing score on the CFA.
Ms. Houlahan. What steps have you taken to help improve the
academies' ability and success in recruiting more women?
General Gilland. The Academy hosts a variety of outreach events to
engage and inspire young people, particularly women, to consider
applying to USMA. These include our Leadership, Ethics, and Diversity
in STEP conferences, mobile STEM workshops, summer youth sports camps,
and our annual Summer Leaders Experience. Our Admissions Directorate
has also incorporated female-specific marketing materials into its
marketing strategy and issues letters of assurance to higher performing
female applicants.
Additionally, the Academy hosts 14 Cadet diversity-focused clubs
that help influence recruiting through various outreach engagements
throughout the year at schools, conferences, and other events and
venues. Two of these clubs--the Corbin Forum and the Society of Women
Engineers--are primarily focused on women. The Corbin Forum's mission
is to empower and promote women's' leadership within the Corps of
Cadets and the Army through education, engagement, and mentoring. The
Society of Women Engineers encourages young women to enter engineering-
related majors/fields of study at USMA, provides them a professional
support mechanism, and informs them of opportunities open to them as
Army engineers.
USMA's athletics department also recently launched the leadHer
initiative, an effort to mentor, support, and inspire young women
through sports, expose them to USMA and the Army, and provide them the
opportunity to interact with Cadets and Cadet-athletes.
Ms. Houlahan. How many classes at your institution engage with
diversity, equity, and inclusion topics and what percent is this of the
total course catalog? In your view, are there any classes where this
information is included but is irrelevant to the course of study? Would
removal of this information from courses irreparably damage a student's
education in fields such as leadership, political science, sociology,
or anthropology?
General Gilland. To complete the optional Diversity and Inclusion
Studies Minor, cadets must take three of seven courses with a strong
focus on issues related to diversity and inclusion. We have a total of
1,038 courses at the Academy, so these seven courses represent 0.67% of
the courses in our course catalog.
To complete the minor, cadets also must take two more courses (for
a total of five courses) out of a selection of 38 courses which touch
on topics related to diversity and inclusion. Those 38 courses (which
include the seven discussed previously) represent 3.6% of all courses
at the Academy.
Removal of information and discussion related to race, gender,
sexuality, or diversity in general from all courses would be
detrimental to our Academic program and the development of future
officers. We seek to produce Soldier-Scholars who fight and win the
Nation's wars in operational environments that will manifest at much
greater speed across all domains, both physically and cognitively. For
this reason, we do not avoid discussing hard or uncomfortable topics in
the academic program. West Point encourages cadets to display
intellectual curiosity, engage in deep academic discourse, and
communicate ideas both effectively and with civility. West Point's
classrooms include vibrant discussions on a multitude of topics, and
our academic program encourages independent, critical thought essential
for developing cadets into leaders of character. Further, sustaining
West Point's reputation as the world's preeminent leader development
institution requires the intellectual courage to engage in meaningful
discourse.
Through the academic program's focus on critical and analytical
thinking, we develop cadets into discerning, rather than passive,
consumers of information. Cadets learn the historical, political, and
social context of the ideas they study, but more importantly they learn
how to evaluate and identify the strengths and weaknesses of competing
perspectives through well-reasoned analysis. In a time of economic
turbulence, active social movements, and political polarization,
studying a wide range of ideas prepares our graduates to develop
diverse groups into cohesive teams by introducing them to the ideas
that shape the worldviews of those they will lead.
Ms. Houlahan. Given increased reports of sexual assaults and
harassment at the military academies, how are your respective
institutions investigating sexual assault and harassment cases and have
you implemented any recent changes in light of these findings?
Admiral Buck. For sexual harassment cases, individuals have the
option of filing formal, informal, or anonymous reports. Formal reports
are investigated per the Command Managed Equal Opportunity (CMEO)
system while informal reports are investigated via a Command
Preliminary Investigation. These options are explained in detail to the
victim (or victims) who elect which process they would prefer.
Following the Secretary of the Navy's direction to elevate formal
sexual harassment investigation to a higher authority, USNA coordinated
with the Vice Chief of Naval Operations (VCNO) legal staff to set
investigative policies for USNA. This resulted in a policy where a
formal sexual harassment claim by a midshipman (or midshipmen) is
investigated by the Commandant of Midshipman's CMEO Office, and any
appeal is reviewed by the Superintendent of the Naval Academy's CMEO
and legal offices. Formal sexual harassment complaints by USNA active
duty faculty or staff are normally investigated by the Superintendent's
CMEO Office and if appealed, reviewed by the VCNO CMEO and legal
staffs. In a case where a potential conflict of interest exists at
USNA, the matter would be forwarded to VCNO staff for investigation. A
formal or informal investigation may result in disciplinary or
administrative action against an offender, but will at a minimum spur
action to resolve a sexual harassment matter in a manner that will
protect the victim and eliminate the inappropriate conduct impacting
the victim. USNA victims may also file anonymous sexual harassment
reports through the USNA CMEO office, which may be investigated to the
degree possible given the information provided.
For cases of sexual assault, the victim has the option of filing
either a Restricted or Unrestricted Report. All Unrestricted Reports of
sexual assault are immediately turned over to the Naval Criminal
Investigate Service (NCIS) for investigation. The Restricted Report
option is provided for victims of sexual assault who wish to
confidentially disclose the crime to specifically identified
individuals so they may receive victim advocates services, medical
treatment and/or counseling without triggering the official
investigative process.
The CATCH a Serial Offender (CATCH) Program is a recent initiative
providing adult sexual assault victims who filed Restricted Reports,
certain Unrestricted Reports where the name of the suspect is not
reported to law enforcement or uncovered by law enforcement, or no
report an opportunity to anonymously submit suspect information to help
the DOD identify serial offenders.
To address the lack of progress in dealing with the challenges of
sexual harassment and sexual assault at the Naval Academy, we have
instituted the following additional efforts:
1. Sought the assistance of the National Opinion Research Center
(NORC) at the University of Chicago to assess the effectiveness of our
Sexual Harassment and Assault Prevention Education (SHAPE) program.
NORC is conducting a longitudinal evaluation of the changes in
midshipmen understanding/opinions/actions associated with Sexual
Harassment and Sexual Assault as a result of the SHAPE training and
education. We expect the results of this two-year study later this
summer and will refine our program based on the study's
recommendations.
2. Implemented 4-Minute Drills, to occur at least once a week
during noon meal, during which each squad leader facilitates a scenario
discussion. Scenarios include bystander intervention, gender equality,
racial micro-aggressions, sexual harassment and the newly created
midshipmen ethos. These 4-minute drills have also been implemented into
Plebe Summer training as well, specifically oriented to elicit standard
setting conversations and expectations for the newly inducted Class of
2027.
3. Knowing that alcohol is often a factor in sexual assault cases,
implemented a number of key initiatives to drive down alcohol abuse
overall. This includes an Alcohol Related Incident (ARI) Reduction
Plan, which seeks to promote collective accountability by rewarding
positive behavior and sanctioning negative behavior (alcohol abuse)
within an entire Company ( 150 midshipmen). After the first year of
implementation, the Brigade saw a 62% reduction in ARIs.
4. Hired a Director for Wellness and Prevention, who will advise
the Superintendent on the integration of all programs dedicated to the
prevention of harmful behaviors. We recognize that destructive
behaviors are often related, and have included not only Sexual Assault
and Sexual Harassment, but also harassment and discrimination, intimate
partner violence and stalking, suicidal behavior, and alcohol abuse in
the portfolio of the Director of Wellness and Prevention.
5. Updated the Midshipman Preservation policy to ensure use of the
most effective means by which the Commandant of Midshipmen can assess
risk factors for individual midshipmen and trends across the Brigade of
Midshipmen.
6. Directed Dignity and Respect remediation for midshipmen who have
demonstrated behaviors counter to the `honorable living' ethos, to
ensure accountability and complement Military Justice Reform, where
applicable.
7. Directed a mandatory Brigade-wide culture stand-down of all
sports teams (varsity and club), extracurricular activities, and
student interest groups. Each group, facilitated by the faculty/staff
officer representative, was required to review all documents and social
media accounts to ensure full alignment with the high standards
expected of a USNA midshipman.
8. Reestablished the extracurricular activity/action group ``It's
on Us'' to engage the Brigade of Midshipmen in a cultural shift to end
sexual harassment and violence at the Academy.
9. USNA is collaborating with the Air Force Academy to determine a
possible way forward to adopt and adapt their ``Let's Be Clear''
Campaign for implementation at USNA. ``Let's Be Clear'' is the USAFA
Academy's long-term Sexual Assault Prevention and Response plan to
shift its' culture and encourage prevention and response focused along
three sub-themes: leaders of character create healthy cultures;
warfighters respond to harm courageously; and effective teams
accelerate appropriate accountability.
10. Finalizing an ``On Ramp Program'' to better support survivors
of sexual assault and other traumatic life events with recovery and
reintegration into the routine activities of the Brigade of Midshipmen.
11. Developed a Plan of Action and Milestones for the
implementation and execution of required command climate assessments.
12. Conducted an On-Site Installation Evaluation (OSIE), led by an
Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness team, to better
understand troubling trends in sexual assault, sexual harassment, and
other destructive behaviors. With the findings of this OSIE and similar
evaluations at the other Military Service Academies, the Secretary of
Defense has issued a series of actions which USNA and the Department of
the Navy are actively pursuing.
Finally, the pending shift, assigning the Office of Special Trial
Counsel (OSTC) to review, act on, and dispose of sexual assault
allegations is another initiative designed to give victims more faith
and confidence in military justice processing of their cases. Once
operational, the OSTC will assume authority for reviewing sex assault
allegations and investigations to determine whether they should be
tried by court-martial. The Superintendent of the Naval Academy will no
longer exercise that authority. USNA will shift into a support role
when cases involving USNA sexual assault victims are tried in military
courts; providing a bailiff, security personnel, trial funding, and
members to serve on panels (juries) to adjudge the case.
Ms. Houlahan. What measures are you taking to ensure those who
report assaults at the academies are protected from retaliation?
Admiral Buck. Retaliation for victims who report having been
sexually assaulted is an issue that I take very seriously. No one
should have to fear retaliation for reporting a sexual assault, sexual
harassment or any other crime. In both our Sexual Assault training and
our Command Managed Equal Opportunity training (which covers Sexual
Harassment), we train our midshipmen, faculty, and staff on what
constitutes retaliation, reprisal, ostracism, and maltreatment. We
train on methods of reporting these offenses, as well as consequences
and impacts.
I also convene monthly Sexual Assault Case Management Groups
(SACMG), where every case involving a victim at USNA is evaluated.
During the SACMG, I call on professionals from Legal, NCIS, Mental
Health, Chaplains, the Chain-of-Command, and the Victim's Advocate to
ensure we are providing the best possible support. The Victim Advocate
brings forward the victim's concerns with the case, and this may
include instances of retaliation, and even the perception of
retaliation. Considering whether retaliation has occurred, or whether
there is a risk of it occurring, is a standing agenda item for every
single case. In cases of retaliation, I use the SACMG as a forum to
decide, with the help of experts, actions to take.
Ms. Houlahan. What steps have you taken to help improve the
academies' ability and success in recruiting more women?
Admiral Buck. Encouraging qualified candidates from traditionally
underrepresented populations in the naval officer corps to apply for
admission to the Naval Academy is a strategic imperative of the Navy.
USNA's Office of Admissions has retooled or developed new programs over
the last 15 years which have improved female application trends and the
resultant representation in the Brigade of Midshipmen from
approximately 15% in 2006 to 30% today. For our most recently admitted
Class of 2027, 30.6% of the applications came from female candidates
and 31.5% of the newly formed Class were young women--both record highs
for the Naval Academy.
The Naval Academy's outreach efforts follow multiple paths starting
with middle school students to spur their interest in science and
technology as well as exposure to the Naval Academy. We work to
cultivate partnerships with middle schools, high schools and local
groups that mentor young women (and men). Local programs such as
Admissions forums, visits by midshipmen, local STEM events, and
performances by midshipmen led groups such as the Women's Glee Club
assist toward increasing and solidifying awareness of USNA. In
addition, USNA has leveraged internet and social media platforms to
reach underserved groups, including women. This has included
contracting a marketing consultant with internet/social media
expertise, and staff interaction with young women through texting
technology, webinars, and social media engagement.
These programs are complemented by providing opportunities for
students, parents and influencers to visit USNA including Influencer
Conferences, Candidate Visitation weekends, STEM Camp (for rising 9th
to 11th graders) and Summer Seminar (rising seniors). Opportunities to
participate in these programs are a strategic priority for underserved
groups, including women. Increasing application trends and
corresponding percentages of female students who have been admitted in
each incoming class over the last 20 years are the result of these
efforts.
Ms. Houlahan. What is the Naval Academy doing to support
neurodivergent midshipmen, and what measures does the Naval Academy
take to ensure that students that receive accommodations are not
penalized in their military careers?
Admiral Buck. No special accommodations or modifications are made
for neurodivergent students. If such accommodations were employed, they
would make these conditions disqualifying for commission. USNA has a
robust student support network, including our faculty who are available
for extra instruction for academic issues; the Class of 1963 Center for
Academic Excellence that offers supplemental instruction, tutoring,
topical reviews, and strategies for academic success; and the
Midshipmen Development Center that promotes and enhances the
adjustment, well-being, and development of midshipmen through
psychological and nutritional counseling services. These services are
available for all midshipmen.
Ms. Houlahan. How many classes at your institution engage with
diversity, equity, and inclusion topics and what percent is this of the
total course catalog? In your view, are there any classes where this
information is included but is irrelevant to the course of study? Would
removal of this information from courses irreparably damage a student's
education in fields such as leadership, political science, sociology,
or anthropology?
Admiral Buck. The Naval Academy has 22 courses that include
diversity, equity, and/or inclusion topics; this represents 2.7% of the
807 courses in our full course catalog. The included material is
relevant to each of the courses and removal of the material would
damage the student's education and understanding in the respective
field of study.
Ms. Houlahan. Given increased reports of sexual assaults and
harassment at the military academies, how are your respective
institutions investigating sexual assault and harassment cases and have
you implemented any recent changes in light of these findings?
General Clark. Sexual Assault investigations are initiated by the
Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI) and are conducted in
accordance with provisions set forth in Department of Defense
Instruction (DODI) 5505.18 and 5505.19. The Inspector General (IG) has
oversight of the process. OSI assigns a lead investigator who assembles
a team comprised of specially trained investigators, judge advocates,
paralegals, and victim witness assistance personnel to support victims.
The OSI investigator ensures victims of sexual assaults are aware of
and afforded the assistance available to them. The entire process is
subject to review and assessed for compliance IAW DODI directives and
investigative sufficiency.
In Spring 2022, after seeing some concerning data points and trends
from various sources, it was clear there were bigger cultural issues
that needed to be addressed so I directed a cultural reset. We started
with a design sprint to look for root causes and to take a harder look
at our programs to find out what is and isn't working in our training
and our culture. Throughout the process we sought out inputs from
cadets, permanent party, alumni and subject matter experts. We
collected 1200 data points for consideration, prioritized and distilled
them into actionable, measurable lines of efforts that constitute a
campaign. The USAFA ``Let's Be Clear'' Campaign is the culmination of
the leadership team's in-depth examination of the collected data.
In April 2023, I kicked off our cultural reset with a deliberate
roll out of the ``Let's Be Clear'' Campaign to the entire USAFA
population via a series of all-calls with cadets and permanent party.
There are three-phases to the campaign across three Lines of Effort: 1)
Leaders of Character Use Their Power to Prevent Unhealthy Behaviors; 2)
Warfighters Respond to Harm Courageously; and 3) Effective Teams
Accelerate Accountability. The phases are designed to aggressively
implement actions that will help reset our culture and encourage
personal accountability around the issues of sexual harassment and
violence. We completed Phase I in June 2023 and have transitioned to
Phase II.
Some of the changes related to the investigative process include:
SECAF delegated authority to the USAFA Superintendent to
place alleged perpetrators on involuntarily administrative turnback
while their case continues through the justice process.
Implemented an ``Encourage to Report'' policy, an
expansion of ``Safe to Report'' for victims or witnesses of sexual
assault or sexual harassment, bullying and hazing. The policy allows
commanders additional discretion to deviate from mandatory punishments
and addresses the reluctance to report unwanted sexual contact when
other non-sexual infractions have occurred (e.g., underage drinking,
misuse of the cadet pass system).
Conducted a Continuous Process Improvement event on
sexual assault reporting to decrease prosecution/disposition timelines
and increase communication.
Reviewing and upgrade existing USAFA CCTV policy and
technology to increase prevention and deterrence tools.
Implementing enhanced training for all permanent party on
preventing and responding to incidents on the spectrum of harm,
including other trauma-informed skills such as sex assault, mental
health and discrimination.
Additionally, our OSI detachment has hired 2 additional agents,
experienced in sexual assault investigations and in conducting
interviews with young adults in the 18-22-year-old age bracket--the
demographic most applicable to the majority population of this and
every Military Service Academy.
Ms. Houlahan. What measures are you taking to ensure those who
report assaults at the academies are protected from retaliation?
General Clark. USAFA has multiple processes and resources to
identify and address concerns about retaliation. When the Office of
Special Investigations (OSI) initiates a sexual assault investigation,
it also initiates and conducts subsequent investigations related to
reported criminal act(s) directed toward a victim or witness. Related
criminal conduct may include, but is not limited to: communicated
threat(s), physical assault(s), intentional damage to property,
stalking, violation of a no-contact order, etc. The initiation and
results of these investigations are communicated to the team of
specially trained investigators, judge advocates, paralegals, and
victim witness assistance personnel to support victims of sexual
assault.
You may be aware that Congress recently added a Uniform Code of
Military Justice (UCMJ) Article to specifically address retaliation
(Article 132, UCMJ), providing military leaders with an additional tool
to hold individuals who engage in retaliation appropriately
accountable. Victims of sexual assault and domestic violence have
access to independent Victims' Counsel (VC). VCs ensure victims are
aware of the prohibition against retaliation or reprisal and assist in
notifying appropriate authorities when retaliation or reprisal has
occurred. I chair a monthly Sexual Assault Case Management Group (CMG)
where we discuss individual cases and ensure procedural integrity. The
VCs and victim advocates notify me of any allegations of retaliation or
reprisal to ensure concerns are addressed. Victims may also report
instances of retaliation or reprisal to the Inspector General, who has
the authority to independently review and investigate such allegations.
All program procedures are outlined in DODI 6495.02, Volume 3.
Ms. Houlahan. What steps have you taken to help improve the
academies' ability and success in recruiting more women?
General Clark. Over the past 5 years, we made a concerted effort to
increase the number of women applicants. We have increased our women
Admissions Advisors to approximately 35% of our recruiting arm to best
tell the story of USAFA women graduates' success in the Air and Space
Forces. Additionally, we are partnering on recruiting activities
specifically designed for women, to include Women in Aviation, Women in
STEM, Girls in STEM, and Women of Color in STEM.
We have seen an increase in women applicants over the last 5 years,
with the exception of the class of 2026 (See Table 1.) which aligns
with the pandemic during which applicant numbers dropped universally.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T3628.059
.epsMs. Houlahan. How many classes at your institution engage with
diversity, equity, and inclusion topics and what percent is this of the
total course catalog? In your view, are there any classes where this
information is included but is irrelevant to the course of study? Would
removal of this information from courses irreparably damage a student's
education in fields such as leadership, political science, sociology,
or anthropology?
General Clark. Cadets receive approximately 2,400 hours of
warfighting-focused training during their four years at USAFA. Cadets
receive 16 hours (.6%) of Air Force Instruction-directed (AFI 36-7001)
Diversity & Inclusion training during their 4 years. There are 797
academic courses in the USAFA Course of Instruction. Of these, 19
(2.3%) are offered as part of the optional Diversity and Inclusion
Studies Minor (although only 5 of 19 options are required).
In February 2023, the Academy highlighted these courses as evidence
to meet multiple criteria in our four-year assurance argument submitted
to the Higher Learning Commission (HLC). The HLC is the body that
accredits USAFA as an institution of higher learning, and its approval
is essential to awarding accredited degrees. The HLC commented
favorably on our program (including these courses), affirmed our
assurance of academic freedom, and continued our good standing. The
removal of this information from courses could disadvantage a student's
education, especially in the fields of leadership, political science,
sociology, anthropology, etc., which could jeopardize academic freedom,
and undermine USAFA's HLC accreditation.
Exposing our cadets to multiple viewpoints and historical
perspectives will best prepare them to lead in both an increasingly
diverse U.S force as well as in the Joint Operational Environment
across the globe. Our cadets will lead warfighters composing an ever-
expanding, multi-national diverse force--one that may not look like
them, act like them, or think like them--yet nonetheless, remains
postured to fight and win our future wars.
______
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MS. ESCOBAR
Ms. Escobar. Women account for between 24 and 29 percent of
students at the military service academies. Sadly, according to your
own reports, these young women--who are seeking to become leaders in
our military, face the prospect of a hostile environment at the
academies. DOD's 2022 Service Academy Gender Relations Survey found
that during the academic year preceding the survey, an estimated 21.4%
of women at the academies experienced unwanted sexual contact and an
estimated 63% of women experienced sexual harassment. Secretary Austin
called on you to reverse these harmful trends and employ your resources
to advance our common way forward. Given these concerning reports, what
are each of you doing to reverse these dangerous and worryingly
prevalent trends that are primarily affecting women, but also men at
your academy?
General Gilland. The United States Military Academy's (USMA)
efforts to counter sexual assault and sexual harassment (SA/SH) focus
on both response and prevention. As an organization, we respond to all
reports of SA/SH, and have the infrastructure, resources, and
procedures in place to connect victims with restorative care. Our
comprehensive prevention program focuses on equipping Cadets with
prevention and intervention skills, through education, training and
awareness. Key to these efforts is committed and engaged leadership, as
well as peer commitment and intervention.
Over the course of the 2022-2023 Academic Program Year (APY), USMA
implemented a comprehensive and integrated prevention-focused approach,
addressing the risk and protective factors of ALL harmful behaviors,
including SA/SH, utilizing evidence-based/informed approaches. This
effort includes: the ACT Prevention Program in which trained cadets are
embedded within each company to act as peer-educators as well as
conduits to professional resources in the spaces of:
A-Addressing sexual harassment and sexual assault,
C-Creating healthy climates, and
T-Tackling holistic health
Prevention Deep Dives which allow for Corps-wide messaging in large
group briefings followed by TAC-led, small-group discussions within
each company to put the messaging into practice; and Corps-wide
Bystander Intervention Training which allows Cadets to practice the
skills of bystander intervention through guided role-play scenarios.
These efforts align with, and are integrated with, USMA's efforts to
develop leaders of character. Through these efforts, everyone is
working together to create the culture of trust and respect necessary
for prevention.
Ms. Escobar. Women account for between 24 and 29 percent of
students at the military service academies. Sadly, according to your
own reports, these young women--who are seeking to become leaders in
our military, face the prospect of a hostile environment at the
academies. DOD's 2022 Service Academy Gender Relations Survey found
that during the academic year preceding the survey, an estimated 21.4%
of women at the academies experienced unwanted sexual contact and an
estimated 63% of women experienced sexual harassment. Secretary Austin
called on you to reverse these harmful trends and employ your resources
to advance our common way forward. Given these concerning reports, what
are each of you doing to reverse these dangerous and worryingly
prevalent trends that are primarily affecting women, but also men at
your academy?
Admiral Buck. The 2022 Service Academy Gender Relations Survey
demonstrated a lack of progress in dealing with the challenges of
sexual harassment and sexual assault. As such, we have instituted the
following efforts to address this matter:
1. Sought the assistance of the National Opinion Research Center
(NORC) at the University of Chicago to assess the effectiveness of our
Sexual Harassment and Assault Prevention Education (SHAPE) program.
NORC is conducting a longitudinal evaluation of the changes in
midshipmen understanding/opinions/actions associated with Sexual
Harassment and Sexual Assault as a result of the SHAPE training and
education. We expect the results of this two-year study later this
summer and will continue to leverage evidence-based and best-practice
techniques.
2. Implemented 4-Minute Drills, to occur at least once a week
during noon meal, during which each squad leader facilitates a scenario
discussion. Scenarios include bystander intervention, gender equality,
racial micro-aggressions, sexual harassment and the newly created
midshipmen ethos. These 4-minute drills have also been implemented into
Plebe Summer training as well, specifically oriented to elicit standard
setting conversations and expectations for the newly inducted Class of
2027.
3. Knowing that alcohol is often a factor in sexual assault cases,
implemented a number of key initiatives to drive down alcohol abuse
overall. This includes an Alcohol Related Incident (ARI) Reduction
Plan, which seeks to promote collective accountability by rewarding
positive behavior and sanctioning negative behavior (alcohol abuse)
within an entire Company ( 150 midshipmen). After the first year of
implementation, the Brigade saw a 62% reduction in ARIs.
4. Hired a Director for Wellness and Prevention, who will advise
the Superintendent on the integration of all programs dedicated to the
prevention of harmful behaviors. We recognize that destructive
behaviors are often related, and have included not only Sexual Assault
and Sexual Harassment, but also harassment and discrimination, intimate
partner violence and stalking, suicidal behavior, and alcohol abuse in
the portfolio of the Director of Wellness and Prevention.
5. Updated the Midshipman Preservation policy to ensure use of the
most effective means by which the Commandant of Midshipmen can assess
risk factors for individual midshipmen and trends across the Brigade of
Midshipmen.
6. Directed Dignity and Respect remediation for midshipmen who have
demonstrated behaviors counter to the `honorable living' ethos, to
ensure accountability and complement Military Justice Reform, where
applicable.
7. Directed a mandatory Brigade-wide culture stand-down of all
sports teams (varsity and club), extracurricular activities, and
student interest groups. Each group, facilitated by the faculty/staff
officer representative, was required to review all documents and social
media accounts to ensure full alignment with the high standards
expected of a USNA midshipman.
8. Reestablished the extracurricular activity/action group ``It's
on Us'' to engage the Brigade of Midshipmen in a cultural shift to end
sexual harassment and violence at the Academy.
9. USNA is collaborating with the U.S. Air Force Academy (USAFA) to
determine a possible way forward to adopt and adapt their ``Let's Be
Clear'' Campaign for implementation at USNA. ``Let's Be Clear'' is the
USAFA's long-term Sexual Assault Prevention and Response plan to shift
its' culture and encourage prevention and response focused along three
sub-themes: leaders of character create healthy cultures; warfighters
respond to harm courageously; and effective teams accelerate
appropriate accountability.
10. Finalizing an ``On Ramp Program'' to better support survivors
of sexual assault and other traumatic life events with recovery and
reintegration into the routine activities of the Brigade of Midshipmen.
11. Developed a Plan of Action and Milestones for the
implementation and execution of required command climate assessments.
12. Conducted an On-Site Installation Evaluation (OSIE), led by an
Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness team, to better
understand troubling trends in sexual assault, sexual harassment, and
other destructive behaviors. With the findings of this OSIE and similar
evaluations at the other Military Service Academies, the Secretary of
Defense has issued a series of actions which USNA and the Department of
the Navy are actively pursuing.
Additionally, the pending shift, assigning the Office of Special
Trial Counsel (OSTC) to review, act on, and dispose of sexual assault
allegations is another initiative designed to give victims more faith
and confidence in military justice processing of their cases. Once
operational, the OSTC will assume authority for reviewing sex assault
allegations and investigations to determine whether they should be
tried by court-martial. The Superintendent of the Naval Academy will no
longer exercise that authority. USNA will shift into a support role
when cases involving USNA sexual assault victims are tried in military
courts; providing a bailiff, security personnel, trial funding, and
members to serve on panels (juries) to adjudge the case.
Ms. Escobar. Women account for between 24 and 29 percent of
students at the military service academies. Sadly, according to your
own reports, these young women--who are seeking to become leaders in
our military, face the prospect of a hostile environment at the
academies. DOD's 2022 Service Academy Gender Relations Survey found
that during the academic year preceding the survey, an estimated 21.4%
of women at the academies experienced unwanted sexual contact and an
estimated 63% of women experienced sexual harassment. Secretary Austin
called on you to reverse these harmful trends and employ your resources
to advance our common way forward. Given these concerning reports, what
are each of you doing to reverse these dangerous and worryingly
prevalent trends that are primarily affecting women, but also men at
your academy?
General Clark. As USAFA's Superintendent, this is very personal to
me and remains a top priority. I am committed to driving down
prevalence rates. Unequivocally, there is no place for sexual assault
and harassment at USAFA and in the military.
Shortly after I took command in 2020, I focused on dignity and
respect. I added ``Fostering a culture of dignity and respect'' as one
of three institutional priorities and amplified emphasis in our
strategic plan. From 2020-2022, I took deliberate steps to expand cadet
training to focus on understanding the issues, behaviors, and
expectations to include fostering a protective environment. These
courses include: 1) Enhanced Assess, Acknowledge, Act training; 2)
Sexual Communication and Consent and Cadet Healthy Interpersonal Skills
training comparative study; and, 3) Parent Based Intervention (pre-
accessions training). In addition, we reworked USAFA's Leader of
Character framework to explicitly make connections between leadership,
character and preventing harmful behaviors like sexual assault,
harassment, discrimination, etc.
It was clear from the data and survey results that there were
bigger cultural issues that needed to be addressed so I directed a
cultural reset. We started with a design sprint to look for root causes
and to take a harder look at our programs to find out what is and isn't
working in our training and our culture. Throughout the process we
sought out inputs from cadets, permanent party, alumni and subject
matter experts. We collected 1200 data points for consideration,
prioritized and distilled them into actionable, measurable lines of
efforts that constitute a campaign. The USAFA ``Let's Be Clear''
Campaign is the culmination of the leadership team's in-depth
examination of the collected data.
In April 2023, I kicked off our cultural reset with a deliberate
roll out of the ``Let's Be Clear'' Campaign to the entire USAFA
population via a series of all-calls with cadets and permanent party.
There are three-phases to the campaign across three Lines of Effort: 1)
Leaders of Character Use Their Power to Prevent Unhealthy Behaviors; 2)
Warfighters Respond to Harm Courageously; and 3) Effective Teams
Accelerate Accountability. The phases are designed to aggressively
implement actions that will help reset our culture and encourage
personal accountability around the issues of sexual harassment and
violence. We completed Phase I in June 2023 and have transitioned to
Phase II. We are making significant progress and some accomplishments
include:
Delivered Healthy Relationships Education to rising
sophomores (most at-risk cadets).
Approved a revised schedule for Academic Year 23-24 to
provide cadets an additional 90-minute period, 4-6 times per semester
for SH&V-related education and training.
Increased uniformed permanent party weekend dorm
presence.
Implemented an ``Encourage to Report'' policy, an
expansion of ``Safe to Report'' for victims or witnesses of sexual
assault or sexual harassment, bullying and hazing. The policy allows
commanders additional discretion to deviate from mandatory punishments
and addresses the reluctance to report unwanted sexual contact when
other non-sexual infractions have occurred (e.g., underage drinking,
misuse of the cadet pass system).
SECAF delegated authority to the USAFA Superintendent to
place alleged perpetrators on involuntarily administrative turnback
while their case continues through the justice process.
Activated working groups to plan ``Take Back the Night'',
character development time, social media training, CATCH updates, and
remediation program for harmful behaviors.
Implemented open-door policy for occupied dorm rooms and
locked unused dorm rooms.
Embedded victim advocates in our four Cadet Groups.
Improved Air Officer Commanding (AOC; squadron command
level) cohort education by adding a survivor panel, sitting commander
panel, and sexual assault scenario-based exercises.
Conducted a Continuous Process Improvement event on
sexual assault reporting to decrease prosecution/disposition timelines
and increase communication.
Finalized Secretary of Defense-directed ``Return to
Health'' policy to codify our survivor recovery and reintegration
processes.
A new school year has just begun and we are not slowing down. We
are moving forward with the campaign and working towards sustainable
solutions that will facilitate a culture reset. In addition, we are
implementing SecDef directed actions from the memorandums dated 10
March and 16 August, respectively. We owe it to our Airmen and
Guardians to create a culture of dignity and respect where everyone
feels valued and can reach their full potential as the leaders our
country demands. USAFA will continue to refine our prevention and
response efforts to reverse prevalence trends, and to emphasize the
Department of Defense's message that sexual harassment and violence
damages warfighting readiness and will not be tolerated.
______
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MS. STRICKLAND
Ms. Strickland. A recent internal review from the Pentagon found
that bias from junior officers and supervisors is a key reason why
minority troops face harsher treatment in the military criminal justice
system. Given that many cadets first interaction with military
discipline are at the Academies, I am wondering if you have examined
the extent to which such bias issues have been observed at the
Academies? If not, are you planning to do so? If so, what have you
found, and how are you looking to address issues that you may have
identified?
General Gilland. Whenever there is an allegation of misconduct, the
allegation is investigated by CID, MPI, or the command. The purpose of
the investigation is to determine facts, which is done through the
collection of testimonial, physical, and documentary evidence. Those
facts form the basis of any decision that a commander or convening
authority makes about a case disposition.
Legal advisors are involved in all aspects of investigations and
provide an additional layer of neutral and independent review to all
investigations. Independent military lawyers consult with law
enforcement at the conclusion of each investigation and provide legal
reviews of command investigations. The process of investigation, legal
involvement, and review help ensure that only facts are considered when
determining whether there is probable cause or no probable cause to an
allegation.
If probable cause is found, the servicing Judge Advocate provides
advice to the subject's commander about the appropriate disposition for
a particular set of facts. The subject's commander then either takes
disciplinary action as appropriate or forwards the matter to a more
senior commander with greater authorities to dispose of the matter at a
higher level with the potential for more severe consequences.
An internal review of cases that have been referred to court-
martial or to a formal or standard misconduct hearing from fiscal year
2016 to the present does not indicate bias in the system. Of the 53
completed misconduct hearings and four (4) referred courts-martial
where a Cadet was accused of misconduct during this period, 33
respondents were White, 15 were Black, five (5) were Hispanic, three
(3) were Asian, and one (1) was American Indian. The ultimate outcome
of each of these cases was based solely on the facts of the particular
case and ranged from Cadets being not-found (equivalent to an
acquittal) at a misconduct hearing to being found guilty at a General
Courts-Martial and sentenced to 48 months confinement and a dismissal
from the service.
Further, all military personnel, whether cadets, staff, or faculty,
receive annual training in the domains of Military Equal Opportunity.
Regularly reiterating the importance of dignity and respect is the
primary focus. Should a need ever arise, cadets have information posted
in their barracks rooms identifying who their Military Equal
Opportunity Advisors and leaders are, as well as how to contact them.
In the event redress is warranted, cadets, staff and faculty have
hotline information accompanied with identified avenues for anonymous,
informal or formal potential complaints.
Ms. Strickland. A recent internal review from the Pentagon found
that bias from junior officers and supervisors is a key reason why
minority troops face harsher treatment in the military criminal justice
system. Given that many cadets first interaction with military
discipline are at the Academies, I am wondering if you have examined
the extent to which such bias issues have been observed at the
Academies? If not, are you planning to do so? If so, what have you
found, and how are you looking to address issues that you may have
identified?
Admiral Buck. At the Naval Academy, we are sensitive to the
potential for biases in our disciplinary systems. Accordingly, we have
reviewed case data over the years in many different ways, to include
reporting rates and ``guilty'' rates. The data has shown variations
over the years, including at times by demographics, but we have not
concluded that any systemic bias exists. We are continuing to monitor
this topic, and we've recently begun collecting more data on each
report (greater demographics on both the accused and the reporter), but
it will take several years to accumulate enough data before we draw
conclusions.
Ms. Strickland. A recent internal review from the Pentagon found
that bias from junior officers and supervisors is a key reason why
minority troops face harsher treatment in the military criminal justice
system. Given that many cadets first interaction with military
discipline are at the Academies, I am wondering if you have examined
the extent to which such bias issues have been observed at the
Academies? If not, are you planning to do so? If so, what have you
found, and how are you looking to address issues that you may have
identified?
General Clark. Over the last several years the Department of the
Defense (DOD) and the Department of the Air Force (DAF) have launched
initiatives to examine and address racial disparities in discipline and
military justice. In December 2020, the Air Force Inspector General
conducted an Independent Racial Disparity Review and in August 2022,
the DOD conducted an Internal Review on Racial Disparities in the
Investigative and Military Justice Systems. Both of those reviews
included several recommendations which the DOD and the services are
evaluating prior to implementation.
In 2020, USAFA conducted its own internal racial review to better
understand how cadets performed across racial and gender identity
groups. An emphasis area was to understand how cadets were assessed in
military conduct and placed on aptitude probation. The review revealed
disparities for black students in conduct and aptitude probations. To
address these disparities, USAFA created the Superintendent's
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Strategic Plan with four priority
areas--one of which is a specific focus on retention and success across
racial identity groups. These areas are continuously refined via
USAFA's Diversity and Inclusion Action Group (DIAG). The DIAG meets bi-
weekly and conducts an annual review on the plan's overall progress.
Updates are provided to the Superintendent's Diversity and Inclusion
Council.
To reduce any potential impact of race in discipline actions, we
conduct robust training on the fair administration of military justice
to commanders. In addition, all cadets take a Law for Air Force
Officers course in their second year, which includes lessons on the
military justice system, disciplinary processes, and scenario-based
training on the fair administration of discipline.
We continue to evaluate our processes to ensure that discipline is
being administered in a fair and just manner. For example, disciplinary
decisions are made in consultation with attorneys in our Office of the
Staff Judge Advocate. In addition, the adjudication of more serious
disciplinary actions is withheld to higher level authorities such as
the Commandant or Superintendent. Cadets also have access to various
helping agencies to include Area Defense Counsel, Equal Opportunity,
and the Inspector General if they believe their disciplinary action is
unwarranted or based on unlawful considerations such as race.
______
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. DAVIS
Mr. Davis. According to the latest USMA data, 72 percent of
admitted Black enrollees graduated. By comparison, the graduation rate
across demographics came in at 83 percent. To best equip our future
military personnel, we must close this gap. Are you seeing these trends
at the Air Force Academy specifically, and, if so, what can the
oversight bodies, be it the Board of Visitors, Under Secretary
Cisneros, or Secretary Kendall do to remedy it moving forward?
General Clark. USAFA is experiencing similar trends. These trends
are supported by the statistics below. The data does not include cadets
who select ``Two or More Races'':
Current Cadet Wing (Classes 2024-2027) African American
Retention: 85%
African American graduation rate over the last 5 years:
73.9%
African American graduation rate over the last 10 years:
71.3%
I appreciate the continued support that our oversight bodies
provide to USAFA and our ongoing mission to commission leaders of
character. Congressional advocacy for recruiting and retaining cadets
of color is key to ensuring that USAFA and ultimately the Air and Space
Forces are representative of the best of our diverse nation. USAFA is
taking the following additional steps to increase retention which can
inform our oversight bodies as they continue to provide support:
Continuing listening sessions with Way of Life Committee
(Black Student Union) and other affinity clubs to better understand and
address barriers that black cadets experience
Conducting analysis to understand specific domains (e.g.
discipline, academics, social acceptance, artifacts, etc.) in the cadet
experience that show higher rates of attrition
Providing professional development for faculty and staff
on inclusive teaching practices
Exploring adding additional resources and access to the
Academic Support Center
Exploring initiatives to attract and retain more black
faculty and staff, consistent with merit system principles
Mr. Davis. We know about the success of the Air Force ROTC Exchange
program, which gives cadets on the civilian and military side an
opportunity to enrich their academic and professional experiences.
QUESTION LINE 1: Can you speak to the value of JROTC programs in
producing candidates that enter the pipeline for the USAFA?
QUESTION LINE 2: How can we ensure that there is constant
collaboration between JROTC and ROTC programs, including those in
underinvested geographic areas like Elizabeth City in my district, and
the USAFA to attract the best candidates?
General Clark. JROTC and ROTC programs are extremely valuable to
the USAFA pipeline and often serve as our point of access to schools
and communities. Collaboration between our USAFA admissions team and
JROTC programs along with intentional and deliberate synchronization
with Gold Bar recruiters and ROTC programs are essential to maximizing
officer accessions.
Annually, our admissions office hosts a combined training for USAFA
Admissions Advisors and Gold Bar recruiters, and we routinely brief at
the Recruiting Squadron Commander's course. To expand our reach, we
have increased the number of USAFA Admissions Advisors nationwide from
15 to 33. Correspondingly, the Air Force also increased the number of
ROTC Gold Bar recruiters. Many recruiting activities are attended by
both Admissions Advisors and the Gold Bar recruiters as part of our
combined total force recruiting effort resulting in increased crosstalk
and collaboration. JROTC units in the Elizabeth City area provide
direct access for our Admissions Advisors to connect with potentially
eligible candidates with the propensity to serve. Admissions Liaison
Officers and regional Admissions Advisors work with Senior Aerospace
Science Instructors to expose potential applicants to the USAFA
opportunities.
Mr. Davis. Last week, I proudly shepherded a bipartisan NDAA
amendment through the House, co-led with my fellow Air Force veteran,
Rep. Pfluger, that requires DOD to invest in programs to increase
awareness of the MSAs in each congressional district. Estimates
indicate that fewer than 600,000 Americans ages 17-24 are both eligible
and willing to enlist in the military. Given this stark reality, are
you supportive of measures like the one I signed onto to broaden appeal
of MSAs so that our young men and women have all the resources they
need to consider service?
General Clark. I recognize the limitations of the eligible
applicant pool and the associated recruiting challenges. I appreciate
the efforts of all congressional members in building awareness of USAFA
within their congressional districts to bring the best of the nation's
sons and daughters to USAFA.
USAFA currently conducts outreach in every congressional district.
USAFA Admissions offers training for congressional staffs to educate
them on the nomination and selection processes. Routinely, USAFA
Admissions provides support to Academy Days hosted by congressional
members. In addition, the Director of Admissions leverages
opportunities to directly engage with congressional members and their
staffs.
We appreciate the emphasis in the proposed legislation and will
await Department of Defense guidance.
[all]