[Senate Hearing 119-325]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 119-325
THE NOMINATIONS OF: MR. MATTHEW L.
LOHMEIER TO BE UNDER SECRETARY OF AIR
FORCE; MR. JUSTIN P. OVERBAUGH TO BE
DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR
INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY; AND MR.
DANIEL L. ZIMMERMAN TO BE ASSISTANT
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR INTERNATIONAL
SECURITY AFFAIRS
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MAY 1, 2025
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Armed Services
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via: http://www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
63-041 PDF WASHINGTON : 2026
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi,
Chairman
DEB FISCHER, Nebraska
TOM COTTON, Arkansas
MIKE ROUNDS, South Dakota
JONI ERNST, Iowa
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
RICK SCOTT, Florida
TOMMY TUBERVILLE, Alabama
MARKWAYNE MULLIN, Oklahoma
TED BUDD, North Carolina
ERIC SCHMITT, Missouri
JIM BANKS, Indiana
TIM SHEEHY, Montana JACK REED, Rhode Island
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire
KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
TIM KAINE, Virginia
ANGUS S. KING, Jr., Maine
ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts
GARY C. PETERS, Michigan
TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois
JACKY ROSEN, Nevada
MARK KELLY, Arizona
ELISSA SLOTKIN, Michigan
John P. Keast, Staff Director
Elizabeth L. King, Minority Staff
Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
_________________________________________________________________
may 1, 2025
Page
The Nominations of: Mr. Matthew L. Lohmeier to be Under Secretary 1
of Air Force; Mr. Justin P. Overbaugh to be Deputy Under
Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security; and Mr.
Daniel L. Zimmerman to be Assistant Secretary of Defense for
International Security Affairs.
Members Statements
Wicker, Senator Roger F.......................................... 1
Reed, Senator Jack............................................... 2
Witness Statements
Hagerty, Senator Bill............................................ 4
Lohmeier, Mr. Matthew L., to be Under Secretary of Air Force..... 5
Advance Policy Questions....................................... 48
Questions for the Record....................................... 72
Nomination Reference and Report................................ 91
Biographical Sketch............................................ 92
Committee on Armed Services Questionnaire...................... 94
Signature Page................................................. 99
Overbaugh, Mr. Justin P., to be Deputy Under Secretary of Defense 8
for Intelligence and Security.
Advance Policy Questions....................................... 99
Questions for the Record....................................... 120
Nomination Reference and Report................................ 132
Biographical Sketch............................................ 133
Committee on Armed Services Questionnaire...................... 137
Signature Page................................................. 143
Zimmerman, Mr. Daniel L., to be Assistant Secretary of Defense 10
for International Security Affairs.
Advance Policy Questions....................................... 143
Questions for the Record....................................... 156
Nomination Reference and Report................................ 169
Biographical Sketch............................................ 170
Committee on Armed Services Questionnaire...................... 171
Signature Page................................................. 176
(iii)
This hearing is printed to include all available
information
requested or required to be inserted for the
record.
(iv)
THE NOMINATIONS OF: MR. MATTHEW L. LOHMEIER TO BE UNDER SECRETARY OF
AIR FORCE; MR. JUSTIN P. OVERBAUGH TO BE DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY OF
DEFENSE FOR INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY; AND MR. DANIEL L. ZIMMERMAN TO
BE
ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR INTERNATIONAL SECURITY AFFAIRS
----------
THURSDAY, MAY 1, 2025
United States Senate,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:39 a.m. in room
SD-G50, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Senator Roger Wicker
(Chairman of the Committee) presiding.
Committee Members present: Senators Wicker, Fischer,
Cotton, Ernst, Sullivan, Scott, Tuberville, Mullin, Budd,
Schmitt, Sheehy, Reed, Shaheen, Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Hirono,
Kaine, King, Duckworth, and Kelly.
Also present: Senator Hagerty.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR ROGER F. WICKER
Chairman Wicker. I thank our witnesses for being here. We
have a familiar face at the desk also, and I welcome all the
families of our witnesses and thank them for being here this
morning.
As I've said many times, we face an axis of aggressors that
deepen their cooperation every day. A new cooperative
engagement between our enemies strengthens every day. We need
qualified people who are willing to step up and serve during
these dangerous times.
Matthew Lohmeier has served our country as an Active Duty
officer in the Air Force and Space Force. Based on his
experience in uniform, he's been an outspoken proponent of
eliminating the divisive DEI [Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion]
agenda that was the hallmark of the Department of Defense in
the earlier Administration. Fortunately, President Trump and
Secretary Hegseth have done much toward removing DEI at DOD.
Mr. Lohmeier's nomination for Under Secretary of the Air
Force represents an opportunity to evaluate closely the kind of
leadership we need in the Air Force and Space Force at this
pivotal moment. This role requires a steady, unifying presence,
and needs someone who can work across the department to advance
readiness, morale, and mission focus. I look forward to hearing
how Mr. Lohmeier intends to be that needed presence.
Mr. Justin Overbaugh has been nominated to be the Deputy
Under Secretary of Defense for intelligence and Security. In
this role, he would serve as the principal assistant to the
Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security,
overseeing the intelligence, counterintelligence, security, and
law enforcement functions of the DOD.
Mr. Overbaugh's deep experience as an Army officer in the
fields of intelligence and special operations make him ideal
for a candidate of this position. I look forward to hearing his
priorities for ensuring our defense intelligence enterprise is
best postured to provide timely and accurate intelligence to
our warfighters, safeguard DOD sensitive information from our
adversaries, and inform our acquisitions and investments.
Mr. Daniel Zimmerman has been nominated to be the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs. In
this role, he would serve as the principal advisor to the Under
Secretary of Defense for Policy and the lead policy advisor to
all matters related to Europe, NATO, and Russia.
Mr. Zimmerman will have responsibility for managing the
NATO alliance, encountering Russian aggression and malign
activities. His background as an intelligence officer and his
experience working in Congress make him an ideal candidate for
this position. I look forward to hearing his priorities, and
how he plans to revitalize the NATO alliance, and develop
initiatives to counter Russian aggression.
With that, I turn to my friend and colleague, Ranking
Member Reed.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR JACK REED
Senator Reed. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Want
to recognize Mr. Lohmeier, Mr. Overbaugh, and Mr. Zimmerman,
and also our colleague Senator Bill Hagerty. We also want to
recognize the families that are here today.
Now, Mr. Lohmeier, you've been nominated to be the Under
Secretary for the Department of the Air Force. If confirmed,
you would run the day-to-day operations of the Department of
the Air Force and assist the Secretary in leading the largest
fleet of aircraft and space assets in the world. Most
importantly, you would be responsible for managing the hundreds
of thousands of men and women who make up the Air Force and
Space Force.
Mr. Lohmeier, I must confess, I have deep concerns about
your ability to represent these men and women. While I
appreciate your past military service, your record of troubling
conduct in uniform, extreme partisanship, and animosity toward
military members with whom you disagree politically is, in my
view, disqualifying to be the Under Secretary.
We must acknowledge your record of behavior and statements.
In 2021, while you were an Active Duty Space Force Lieutenant
Colonel in command of a large formation, you self-published a
book titled Irresistible Revolution: Marxism's Goal of Conquest
and The Unmaking of the American Military. The book argues that
Marxism is rampant within the ranks and is leading to the
collapse of our military and our society. As you wrote, and
I'll quote to be perfectly clear, ``The path we're on as the
country leads to fratricidal and genocidal warfare.''
While still on Active Duty in command, you went on a far-
right podcast, which was known for spreading misinformation and
conspiracy theories to advertise your book. All this was done
without knowledge or approval of the Department of Defense. You
were immediately relieved of command when your book and podcast
were discovered.
After leaving the Space Force, you have continued to write
and speak extensively about Marxism in the military. You
appeared on dozens of podcasts and panels, and made hundreds of
social media posts about this specific issue. As you write in
your book, Irresistible Revolution, I quote in one respect,
``U.S. military servicemembers are no different than members of
the People's Liberation Army. Each is composed of humans,
humans who share a common nature. Because we share the same
nature, what Marxist's ideology does to the Chinese military
servicemembers, it will do to the American.''
Mr. Lohmeier, I've read much of your writing, and frankly,
I would question your interpretation of Marxism. Nonetheless, I
would make one point clear. I'm concerned that you have a
misguided opinion of American military servicemembers and their
leaders. If confirmed, you would lead an organization that,
like the country it represents, is composed of Republicans,
Democrats, Independents, men and women of all racist creeds and
sexualities. Yet, your language suggests that you regard many
of these men and women as adversaries to be rooted out and
purged from the force.
I would ask that you explain why servicemembers and
civilians who do not share your political opinions can trust
that they will not be targeted under your tenure. Just as
importantly, I hope you'll pledge not to seek a retribution
against any military members or civilians with whom you have
disagreed and publicly criticized in the past, especially as
many of them would serve under you, if confirmed.
I hope you'll address these issues thoroughly and
truthfully during your testimony. The Department of the Air
Force faces enormous challenges in the years ahead. I'm going
to ask for your views and how you would address them.
Mr. Overbaugh, you have been nominated to be Deputy Under
Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security. If
confirmed, you would serve as a principal intelligence advisor
to the Secretary of Defense and would oversee the Defense
intelligence enterprise. Your experience in the special
operations and intelligence community should serve you well in
this role.
Among many issues you will oversee is the complicated
network of Defense intelligence agencies. These agencies, DIA,
NRO, NSA, and others continue to face challenges in efficiently
coordinating intelligence among themselves in providing
adequate resources to joint all-domain military operations.
Such operations require split second targeting support, and I
would like to know how you would ensure their success.
Mr. Zimmerman, you have been nominated to be Assistant
Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs. If
confirmed, you would be the principal advisor of the Under
Secretary of Defense for Policy and the Secretary of Defense on
international issues that relate to Europe, Russia, the Middle
East, Africa, and the Western Hemisphere. I would note your
experience as a career CIA officer with expertise in several of
these regions.
If confirmed, one of your challenges will be to ensure we
continue to have cooperation and support from partners and
allies in Europe and the Middle East, and I'm deeply concerned
about the Administration's comments and actions regarding NATO
and Ukraine. As the Administration continues to expand its
campaign against the Houthis in Yemen, it would be more
important than ever that we have reliable friends abroad to
assist us in other areas. Mr. Zimmerman, I would like you to
know your plans of balancing U.S. long-term international
security objectives against short-term demands.
Thanks, again, to our nominees. I look forward to your
testimoneys. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Wicker. Thank you very much, Ranking Member Reed.
I now have the pleasure of recognizing our colleague, Senator
Hagerty, who I understand will be introducing Mr. Zimmerman
this morning. So, I now turn to you, sir.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR BILL HAGERTY
Senator Hagerty. Thank you, Chairman Wicker, and I want to
thank you as well, Ranking Member Reed, and to all my esteemed
colleagues here. Thank you for holding this hearing today, and
importantly, to all of the very capable staff that are sitting
behind you. Because I hope you'll look at Mr. Zimmerman and the
position that he's in today, and realize that he was amongst
your ranks, and he's sitting here today. I hope that many of
you'll take this as an inspiration.
It's my honor today to introduce my good friend Daniel
Zimmerman, President Trump's nominee to be Assistant Secretary
of Defense for International Security Affairs. Daniel is
tailor-made for this role. For nearly two decades, Daniel has
served with distinction at the Central Intelligence Agency, the
White House, and most recently, right here in the U.S. Senate.
While many of the details of his career remain classified,
I can share a few anecdotes that highlight his experience and
his expertise. Daniel has risked his life in war zones, working
with special operations forces out of Soviet, Arab bunkers in
Iraq to hunt ISIS and other terrorists. He's dealt face to face
with Russian energy oligarchs, and traveled the world from
Europe, to the Middle East, to the Indo-Pacific, all on
sensitive matters that are related to energy and trade
security. Daniel was one of the first people whom the White
House hired to support the historic Abraham Accords, which is
one of President Trump's signature achievements from his first
term that is still bearing fruit in the Middle East today.
For the last 15 months, I've had the great pleasure of
having Daniel on my Senate staff. He's been a detailee who
served with distinction. During this time, I found that his
tremendous leadership skills, his knowledge of global issues,
are matched only by his humility and his character. He's been a
wonderful colleague and a friend.
Daniel's the right person to serve as the next Assistant
Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs, and I
urge the members of this committee to move quickly on his
nomination. Thank you all for taking him into account this
morning.
Chairman Wicker. Thank you very much, Senator Hagerty, and
you are free to stay, but I'm sure your schedule is quite busy.
Senator Kaine. So, Mr. Chair, I think a number of us, were
hoping to cross-examine Senator Hagerty before he departs.
[Laughter.]
Chairman Wicker. Five minutes each for the first round.
[Laughter.]
Chairman Wicker. Only because it's a Thursday, we'll skip
that today. Thank you. We will now begin with opening
statements and we'll go in the order of Lohmeier, Overbaugh,
and Zimmerman.
Mr. Lohmeier, you are recognized for 5 minutes for your
opening statement, sir.
STATEMENT OF MR. MATTHEW L. LOHMEIER, TO BE UNDER SECRETARY OF
AIR FORCE
Mr. Lohmeier. Thank you, Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member
Reed, and members of this committee for considering my
nomination to be Under Secretary of the Department of the Air
Force. I'm grateful for the opportunity, and for the trust of
President Trump. To the many troops, men, and women, both
uniformed and civilian, who have expressed overwhelming support
for me, thank you to those listening who have served or who
presently serve. You have my gratitude.
I wish to acknowledge and thank my friends and family for
their support, some of whom are here today, including my
parents. I'd especially like to acknowledge and thank my wife,
Sarah, who is here. What a blessing it is for a man who
personally cares deeply about the Air Force core values of
integrity first, service before self, and excellence in all we
do, to live with a wife who likewise believes in and embodies
those values. Furthermore, she more than anyone else knows that
I strive to be a man of integrity, and that I hope to inspire
others to live in that same spirit.
The Under Secretary of the Air Force is by law the Chief
Management Officer of the Department of the Air Force. My
breadth of experience serving in both the Air and Space Forces
makes me uniquely qualified for the job at this pivotal time in
American history, a time in which we face very serious threats
to our national security.
Even before receiving my commission, while still a cadet at
the United States Air Force Academy 20 years ago, I began to
become aware of the threats we face when I participated in a
special exchange program to China that we no longer have. The
U.S. Government sent a small contingent of Mandarin-speaking
Air Force Cadets to the People's Liberation Army Air Force
Academy in Changchun, China. It's north of North Korea.
For a brief cold stint in March 2005, I lived in the dorms
with the PLA cadets, attended their classes, even aeronautical
engineering, did PT with those cadets in the snow, ate in their
chow hall, and was wittingly placed on a losing basketball team
so that they could film our crushing defeat in front of their
entire cadet body, no doubt for distribution in State media.
Most U.S. Air Force Academy cadets know what I mean when I
say there's no better view of the Air Force Academy than in the
rear-view mirror. But after spending time at the Chinese Air
Force Academy, returning to USFA was a treat. Later, after
graduating and receiving a commission from the Air Force
Academy, I finished pilot training and became a T-38 instructor
pilot where I taught future fighter pilots for both the United
States and our foreign mission partners.
I then flew F-15Cs out of Kadena Airbase in Okinawa, Japan.
That assignment served as yet another reminder to me of the
threat posed by the PRC to our allies and our strategic
partners, as well as to our own economic prosperity, and
military interests at home and abroad. I am keenly aware of
that threat, and I understand the need for ready Air and Space
Forces well trained and equipped to meet the China challenge to
deter any aggression, and if needed, to defeat that aggression.
Following my time in the cockpit, I transferred to what was
then Air Force Space Command, and provided strategic and
theater missile warning for the United States and our allies.
When the Space Force was subsequently created, I was entrusted
with command of that same mission leading a combined operation
of U.S. and allied partners in control of our Nation's $18
billion space-based missile warning architecture.
I share that background to make this point. I speak the
language of both the Air Force and the Space Force. I am air-
minded and space-minded. I understand the necessity of United
States superiority in both of those war fighting domains.
Space, in particular, is a strategic domain. It is a theater
where we pursue many objectives, and where the United States
must prevail. Space is necessarily also an operational domain
because our ability to access and use space is a vital national
interest.
Despite my background, I've been startled by just how much
has changed and developed technologically since I left Active
Duty just shy of 4 years ago. My surprise is evidence of the
dynamic and rapidly evolving threat environment, mentioned here
several weeks ago by Dr. Troy Meink. Combatant commanders are
calling for more air and space power capacity, not less. I'm
persuaded that, if confirmed, I must be a strong advocate for a
larger and better funded Department of the Air Force. Every
single national security option the President needs is
underpinned by air space power.
The President has nominated me for this important position
with the trust that I'll be a driving force behind a culture of
integrity in the Department of the Air Force. This includes
eliminating all unnecessary distractions, and enabling military
members to focus on their mission.
Secretary Hegseth has said his priorities include restoring
the warrior ethos, and a focus on warfighting, rebuilding the
military, and reestablishing deterrence. I am firmly aligned
with those priorities, and there are unique ways in which they
must be accomplished in the air and space forces. If confirmed,
all of my efforts will be nested within that framework.
Thank you, and I look forward to taking your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Matthew L. Lohmeier
follows:]
Prepared Statement by Statement of Mr. Matthew L. Lohmeier
Thank you, Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Reed, and members of
this Committee, for considering my nomination to be the Under Secretary
of the Department of the Air Force. I'm grateful for the opportunity,
and for the trust of President Trump.
To the many troops--men and women, both uniformed and civilian--who
have expressed overwhelming support for me: thank you. To those here or
who may be listening who have served or who presently serve: you have
my gratitude.
I wish to acknowledge and thank my friends and family for their
support, some of whom are here today. I'd especially like to
acknowledge and thank my wife Sara, who is here with me today. What a
blessing it is for a man who personally cares deeply about the Air
Force core values of Integrity First, Service Before Self, and
Excellence in All We Do, to live with a wife who likewise believes in
and embodies those values. Furthermore, she, more than anyone else,
knows that I strive to be a man of integrity, and that I hope to
inspire others to live in that same spirit.
The Under Secretary of the Air Force is, by law, the Chief
Management Officer of the Department of the Air Force. My breadth of
experience serving in both the Air and Space Forces makes me uniquely
qualified for the job at this pivotal time in American history.
Even before receiving my commission, while still a cadet at the
United States Air Force Academy 20 years ago, I participated in a
special exchange program to China that we no longer have. The U.S.
Government sent a small contingent of Mandarin-speaking Air Force
cadets to the People's Liberation Army Air Force Academy in ChangChun,
China (it's north of North Korea). For a brief, cold stint in March
2005, I lived in the dorms with PLA cadets, attended their classes, did
PT with those cadets in the snow, ate in their chow hall, and was
wittingly placed on a losing basketball team so that they could film
our crushing defeat in front of their entire cadet body, no doubt for
distribution in the State media.
Later, after graduating and receiving a commission from the Air
Force Academy, I finished pilot training and became a T-38 instructor
pilot, where I taught future fighter pilots for both the United States
and our foreign mission partners. I then flew F-15Cs out of Kadena Air
Base in Okinawa, Japan. That assignment served as yet another reminder
to me of the threat posed by China to our allies and strategic
partners, as well as to our own economic prosperity and military
interests at home and abroad.
I am keenly aware of that threat, and I understand the need for
ready air and space forces, well-trained and equipped to meet the China
challenge, to deter any aggression and--if needed--to defeat it.
Following my time in the cockpit, I transferred to what was then
Air Force Space Command and provided strategic and theater missile
warning for the United States and our allies. When the Space Force was
subsequently created, I was entrusted with command of that same
mission, leading a combined operation of U.S. and allied partners in
control of our Nation's $18 billion space-based missile warning
architecture.
I speak the language of the Air Force and the Space Force, I am
air-minded and space-minded, and I understand the necessity of United
States superiority in both of those warfighting domains. Despite my
background, however, I've been startled by just how much has changed
and developed technologically since I left Active Duty just shy of 4
years ago. My surprise is evidence of the dynamic and rapidly evolving
threat environment mentioned here several weeks ago by Dr. Troy Meink.
Combatant Commanders are calling for more air and space power capacity,
not less. I'm persuaded that, if confirmed, I must be a strong advocate
for a larger and better-funded Department of the Air Force. Every
single national security option the President needs is underpinned by
air and space power.
The President has nominated me for this important position with the
trust that I will be a driving force behind a culture of integrity in
the Department of the Air Force. This includes eliminating all
unnecessary distractions and enabling military members to focus on
their mission. The American people, like me, want nothing less than to
enable our Department's men and women to succeed so that our military
can--through strength--deter conflict.
Secretary Hegseth has said his priorities include 1) Restoring the
Warrior Ethos and a Focus on Warfighting, 2) Rebuilding the Military,
and 3) Reestablishing Deterrence. I am firmly aligned with those
priorities, and there are unique ways in which they must be
accomplished in the Air and Space Forces. If confirmed, all of my
efforts will be nested within that framework.
Thank you, again, and I look forward to your questions.
Chairman Wicker. Thank you very much. Mr. Overbaugh.
STATEMENT OF MR. JUSTIN P. OVERBAUGH, TO BE DEPUTY UNDER
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY
Mr. Overbaugh. Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Reed, and
distinguished members of this committee, thank you for the
chance to appear before you today, and for your consideration
of my nomination to be Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for
Intelligence and Security. I am honored and grateful for this
opportunity to serve our great nation.
I'm truly humbled by the nomination, and thankful to
President Trump and Secretary Hegseth for placing their trust
in me. Above all, I am profoundly grateful to God for his
countless blessings, and the unmerited grace and forgiveness He
so generously offers through his son Jesus Christ. I'm joined
today by my precious wife of 21 years, Rebecca, and our four
sons; Joshua, Benjamin, Gabriel, and Matthias of whom we are so
proud. We are also blessed to have a number of family, friends,
and former teammates with us here today and watching online as
well. Having their love and support means the world to me.
If confirmed, I look forward to bringing over 25 years of
intelligence and security experience to the role. Most
recently, I served as director of intelligence for a special
operations joint task force, supporting a new U.S. Special
Operations Command organization focused on global coordination
of unique capabilities against great power competitors. I
collaborated extensively across the intelligence community, the
interagency, and with foreign partners to address high priority
threats.
Prior to that, I held leadership and staff positions in
human intelligence, counterintelligence, and counter-terrorism.
In these roles, I led both military and civilian teammates in
tactical and operational deployments to both Afghanistan and
Iraq, and strategic assignments in Europe and the United
States.
I routinely informed Pentagon and Combatant Command
decisionmaking regarding joint and multilateral sensitive
intelligence operations, which I also personally coordinated
with chiefs of station and foreign intelligence partners across
Europe. These operations were instrumental in countering
foreign influence and terror threats against the United States
and our partners, strengthening relationships with key allies
and positioning our forces to deter, and if necessary, defeat
our adversaries.
If confirmed, along with supporting the priorities of
Secretary Hegseth and Mr. Hansell, should he also be confirmed,
I will advocate for the following areas of emphasis. I hope to
lead the enterprise in strategic assessments that shape defense
requirements, ensuring they are data-driven, actionable, and
aligned with national security priorities. I believe that we do
not have the resources to cover all threats simultaneously.
Therefore, we must be deliberate and discerning about the
capabilities we pursue to defend our Nation and deter, or if
necessary, defeat our adversaries.
If confirmed, I would encourage the enterprise to reassess
established analytical frameworks, fostering innovation and
adaptive thinking to tackle dynamic threats. I believe the
warrior ethos includes the courage and mental clarity required
to challenge personal and institutional bias, and overcome
bureaucratic intransigence.
Finally, I would drive the enterprise to prioritize
actionable intelligence, providing clear insights to support
decisionmaking from the platoon leader to the President. I
believe intelligence professionals must be able to separate
signals from noise in order to be value added to the
warfighter.
Progress in these areas would improve decision support and
security for the enterprise and the American people. This is
desperately needed as I sincerely believe we face some of the
most daunting challenges in the history of our Nation.
Again, I thank you for your consideration, and I look
forward to answering your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Justin P. Overbaugh
follows:]
Prepared Statement by Statement of Mr. Justin P. Overbaugh
Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Reed, and distinguished members of
this Committee, thank you for the chance to appear before you today and
for your consideration of my nomination to be the Deputy Under
Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security.
I am honored and grateful for this opportunity to serve our great
Nation. I am truly humbled by the nomination, and thankful to President
Trump and Secretary Hegseth for placing their trust in me.
Above all, I am profoundly grateful to God for His countless
blessings and the unmerited grace and forgiveness He so generously
offers through His son Jesus Christ.
I am joined today by my precious wife of 21 years, Rebecca and our
four sons, Joshua, Benjamin, Gabriel, and Matthias, of whom we are so
proud.
If confirmed, I look forward to bringing over 25 years of
intelligence and security experience to the role. Most recently, I
served as director of intelligence for a special operations joint task
force, supporting a new U.S. Special Operations Command organization
focused on global coordination of unique capabilities against great
power competitors. I collaborated extensively across the intelligence
community, the interagency, and with foreign partners to address high-
priority threats. Prior to that, I held leadership and staff positions
in human intelligence, counterintelligence, and counterterrorism. In
these roles, I led both military and civilian teammates in tactical and
operational deployments to both Afghanistan and Iraq and strategic
assignments in Europe and the United States. I routinely informed
Pentagon and Combatant Command decisionmaking regarding joint and
multilateral sensitive intelligence operations, which I also personally
coordinated with chiefs of station and foreign intelligence partners
across Europe. These operations were instrumental in countering foreign
intelligence and terror threats against the United States and our
partners, strengthening relationships with key allies and positioning
our forces to deter, and if necessary, defeat our adversaries.
If confirmed, along with supporting the priorities of Secretary
Hegseth and Mr. Hansell (should he also be confirmed), I will advocate
for the following areas of emphasis:
I hope to lead the enterprise in strategic assessments that shape
defense requirements, ensuring they are data-driven, actionable, and
aligned with national security priorities. I believe that we do not
have the resources to cover all threats simultaneously, therefore we
must be deliberate and discerning about the capabilities we pursue to
defend our Nation and deter, or if necessary, defeat, our adversaries.
If confirmed, I would encourage the enterprise to reassess
established analytical frameworks, fostering innovation and adaptive
thinking to tackle dynamic threats. I believe the Warrior Ethos
includes the courage and mental clarity required to challenge personal
and institutional bias and overcome bureaucratic intransigence.
Finally, I would drive the enterprise to prioritize actionable
intelligence, providing clear insights to support decisionmaking from
the platoon leader to the President. I believe intelligence
professionals must be able to separate signals from noise in order to
be value added to the Warfighter.
Progress in these areas would improve decision support and security
for the enterprise and the American people. This is desperately needed
as I sincerely believe we face some of the most daunting challenges in
the history of our Nation.
Again, I thank you for your consideration and look forward to
answering your questions.
Chairman Wicker. Thank you, sir. Mr. Zimmerman.
STATEMENT OF MR. DANIEL L. ZIMMERMAN, TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY
OF DEFENSE FOR INTERNATIONAL SECURITY AFFAIRS
Mr. Zimmerman. Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Reed, and
distinguished members of the Armed Services Committee, thank
you for the chance to appear before you today to be considered
for the role of Assistant Secretary of Defense for
International Security Affairs.
I am honored by the President's nomination and by his
trust. I also thank Secretary Hegseth and Under Secretary Colby
for their support. I'm humbled by Senator Hagerty's
introduction, and grateful for his leadership and example
Mr. Chairman, with permission, I'll briefly mention some
priorities that, if confirmed, I would anticipate meriting my
full attention from day one. The International Security Affairs
role spans Europe, Russia, Ukraine, Eurasia, the Middle East,
and Africa. These theaters present many issues of consequence,
which must be addressed judiciously and in ways that fully
support the Department's primary goals of securing the homeland
and deterring China.
In my view, doing this will require cultivating strong
partnerships in these regions that further U.S. interests, and
encourage our allies urgently to embrace greater responsibility
and burden sharing, which is both in their interest and ours.
Resolutely addressing with allies persistent threats to our
interests, such as those posed by Russia, Iran's potential to
develop a nuclear weapon and terrorism, and countering China's
ability to project military power influence in these theaters.
All this can and should be done in a way that advances the
President's and Secretary's America First, peace through
strength agenda.
If confirmed, I would draw on almost two decades of
national security experience, intelligence, in policy roles,
and in the field where I've had the privilege to work on many
of the same issues and regions involved in this portfolio. The
challenges are serious, yet familiar.
Mr. Chairman, if I may introduce my family. My parents,
David Zimmerman and Beth Zimmerman are here, to whom I owe
immeasurable gratitude. I would like to acknowledge my sister,
Tabitha Zimmerman, and three brothers; Ethan Zimmerman, Luke
Zimmerman, and Nic Zimmerman, who along with my dad, have all
served or are serving in our military and along with their
exemplary colleagues. They hold my deepest respect.
My four brave children are here; Ransom Zimmerman, Anchor
Zimmerman, Haven Zimmerman, and Liberty Zimmerman. I have asked
them to behave unless I get asked a tough question.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Zimmerman. Most important, my wife, Chloe Zimmerman, is
here, a constant friend without parallel who continues to
transform my life. I'm grateful for many other family and
friends attending or listening today, and I give thanks to my
great shepherd, the Lord Jesus.
Mr. Chairman, if confirmed to this role, I would apply
myself with all the humility, vigor, and excellence our country
expects and deserves to help preserve the inestimable blessings
of liberty for us and for the next generation. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Daniel Zimmerman follows:]
Prepared Statement by Statement of Daniel Zimmerman
Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Reed, and Members of the Armed
Services Committee----
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you to be considered
for the role of Assistant Secretary of Defense for International
Security Affairs.
I am honored by the President's nomination, and by his trust. I
also thank Secretary Hegseth and Under Secretary Colby for their
support.
I am humbled by Senator Hagerty's introduction and am grateful for
his leadership and example.
Mr. Chairman, with permission, I will briefly mention some
priorities that--if con.rmed--I would anticipate meriting my full
attention from Day One. The International Security Affairs role spans
Europe, Russia, Ukraine, Eurasia, the Middle East, and Africa. These
theaters present many issues of consequence, which must be addressed
judiciously and in ways that fully support the Department's primary
goals of securing the homeland and deterring China. In my view, doing
this will require:
Cultivating strong partnerships in these regions that
further U.S. interests and encourage our allies urgently to embrace
greater responsibility and burden sharing--which is both in their
interest and ours;
Resolutely addressing, with allies, persistent threats to
our interests such as those posed by Russia, Iran's potential to
develop a nuclear weapon, and terrorism;
And countering China's ability to project military power
and influence in these theaters.
All this can and should be done in a way that advances the
President's and the Secretary's America first, peace through strength
agenda.
If confirmed, I would draw on almost two decades of national
security experience in Intelligence, in policy roles, and in the field,
where I have had the privilege to work on many of the same issues and
regions involved in this portfolio. The challenges are serious, yet
familiar.
Mr. Chairman, if I may introduce my family, my parents David and
Beth Zimmerman are here, to whom I owe immeasurable gratitude. I would
like to acknowledge my sister Tabitha and three brothers Ethan, Luke,
and Nic--who along with my Dad have all served or are serving in our
military. Along with their exemplary colleagues, they hold my deepest
respect.
My four brave children are here--Ransom, Anchor, Haven, and
Liberty. Most important, my wife Chloe is here--a constant friend
without parallel, who continues to transform my life.
I am grateful for many other family and friends attending or
listening today. And I give thanks my Great Shepheard, the Lord Jesus.
Mr. Chairman, I love this country. If confirmed to this role, I
would apply myself with all the humility, vigor and excellence our
country expects and deserves--to help preserve the inestimable
blessings of liberty for us and for the next generation.
Chairman Wicker. Well, thank you.
Thanks to all three of you, and again, welcome to the
family and friends. We now move to standard questions which are
required of all civilian nominees. So, if you'll each turn your
mics on and answer audibly. Have you adhered to applicable laws
and regulations governing conflicts of interest?
[Witnesses answer in the affirmative.]
Chairman Wicker. Have you assumed any duties or taken any
actions that would appear to presume the outcome of the
confirmation process?
[Witnesses answer in the negative.]
Chairman Wicker. Exercising our legislative and oversight
responsibilities makes it important that this committee, its
subcommittees, and other appropriate committees of Congress
receive testimony, briefings, reports, records, and other
information from the executive branch on a timely basis. Do you
agree, if confirmed, to appear and testify before this
committee when requested?
[Witnesses answer in the affirmative.]
Chairman Wicker. Do you agree to provide records,
documents, and electronic communications in a timely manner
when requested by this committee, its subcommittees, or other
appropriate committees of Congress, and to consult with a
requester regarding the basis for any good faith delay or
denial in providing such records?
[Witnesses answer in the affirmative.]
Chairman Wicker. Will you ensure that your staff complies
with deadlines established by this committee for the production
of reports, records, and other information, including timely
responding to hearing questions for the record?
[Witnesses answer in the affirmative.]
Chairman Wicker. Will you cooperate in providing witnesses
and briefers in response to congressional requests?
[Witnesses answer in the affirmative.]
Chairman Wicker. Will those witnesses and briefers be
protected from reprisal for their testimony or briefings?
[Witnesses answer in the affirmative.]
Chairman Wicker. Thank you very much.
Now, we will move to questions by individual members of the
committee, and I'll begin. First, for each of you. Much of the
funding in the Reconciliation Bill, which is being put together
now in the House and Senate, because of our rules, has to be
unspecific and will technically be at the discretion of the
Department of Defense, though we will write recommendations for
them.
A quick yes or no from each of you, and begin with Mr.
Lohmeier. Do you commit to follow unequivocally the Congress's
spending recommendation in Defense reconciliation?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, Chairman.
Chairman Wicker. Mr. Overbaugh?
Mr. Overbaugh. Yes, Chairman Wicker.
Chairman Wicker. Mr. Zimmerman?
Mr. Zimmerman. Yes, Chairman.
Chairman Wicker. Thank you very much.
Then let's move then to Mr. Zimmerman and your prepared
testimony. You mentioned burden sharing. Let's talk about NATO
and the first Trump term. The President demanded that all NATO
allies meet their burden-sharing obligations. Do you think the
NATO members took this challenge seriously? It seems that
they're reversing nearly two decades of decline. Do you believe
this spending marks a renewed commitment on the part of our
NATO allies to burden sharing, Mr. Zimmerman?
Mr. Zimmerman. Senator, thank you for the question. NATO is
a very important alliance that U.S. commitments there are grave
and serious. I do think there's general consensus that the
alliance has to adapt. You mentioned very appropriately in your
opening remarks, a threat environment where our adversaries are
colluding and collaborating even more and more, underscoring
the need for strong alliances and partnerships and greater
burden sharing.
I think there is reason to be encouraged by actions that
some NATO members have taken to take greater ownership of their
security needs and be alliance partners. I think the
Administration has identified an urgent need for that process
to accelerate.
Chairman Wicker. Okay, and one other thing, and I'm glad to
hear you come down strongly on behalf of our participation in
this very important NATO alliance. As far as I know, we do not
yet have a Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for NATO. Will
you commit to filling this position at the earliest
opportunity?
Mr. Zimmerman. Senator, to the extent I can manage that, I
commit.
Chairman Wicker. Okay, and do you agree it would be very
important for that to be filled based on your earlier
testimony?
Mr. Zimmerman. Senator, the NATO alliance is a very
important alliance.
Chairman Wicker. Okay. Thank you very much.
Let me go back to Mr. Lohmeier, and let me choose my words
here. As the Department of the Air Force makes major basing
decisions, currently including platforms and mission sets like
F-15EX, KC-46, and space control, and very soon the future CCA
and the F-47 support infrastructure, many of us on the
committee remain concerned about the consistency, fairness, and
transparency of the process.
Mr. Lohmeier, are you aware that in the Fiscal Year 2025
NDAA, which was passed by the Congress and signed into law by
the President, we prohibited programmatic basing decisions or
programmatic sole source basing decisions? Are you aware of
that?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, Senator.
Chairman Wicker. If confirmed, will you commit to upholding
this law?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, Senator. I am committed to upholding the
law in every respect, if I'm confirmed.
Chairman Wicker. Okay. Well, and let me just say, how you
do this is going to be very important. There are strategic
imperatives and objective criteria that should be paramount
rather than political considerations.
Frankly, I'm going to say this after the politicization of
the Space Command Headquarters basing decision, do you think
we've got some confidence rebuilding to do, and what
specifically will you do to restore confidence that this is
being called according to statute and called by the numbers?
Mr. Lohmeier. Well, I think it's very important, Senator,
and I share your concern that we eliminate the politics of the
decisionmaking process. The service secretaries and the Under
Secretaries should work very carefully to make data-driven
decisions and decisions that will most benefit the warfighter
and our strategic posturing around the globe.
So, you have my commitment, if confirmed, that we'll do our
very best to make sure those decisions are based on the needs
of those capabilities in various locations and strategy, not
based on politics.
Chairman Wicker. Thank you very much. How's your Mandarin?
Mr. Lohmeier. Hai hao.
Chairman Wicker. Did you get that Madam Clerk? Thank you
very much. Senator Reed.
Senator Reed. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Lohmeier, you posted the following on your X account on
October 19th, 2024. ``If we are fortunate enough to see a Trump
presidency once again, then there will be serious consequences
for those senior leaders who have broken their oath, betrayed
the trust of the American people, and participated in the
hyper-politicalization of the uniformed services. Let me tell
you about one such officer who still serves--'' Mr. Lohmeier,
what did you mean by serious consequences for these officers,
many who are still serving and would be serving in the Air
Force?
Mr. Lohmeier. Thank you for bringing this up, Senator. I
share your concern for and commitment to ensuring that we've
got a relatively apolitical military workplace. It was one of
the driving motivating factors prior to my separation from
service in the fall of 2021 for the things that I wrote and
spoke about.
I was never publicly critical of my chain of command. I was
never publicly critical of my senior leaders while I served in
the uniform of my country. As you mentioned, that post was put
on X in my private capacity as a private citizen in 2024. I've
been out of uniform for the past 4 years, nearly, and have
rather enjoyed my ability to speak freely and express a full
range of the expression of my ideas on platforms such as X.
However, I'm very committed, if confirmed, to making sure
that we eliminate political distractions from the military
workplace. Our servicemembers and the American people truly
deserve the opportunity to serve in a nonpartisan military
workplace. What I meant by the statement was that I believe
that a Trump presidency or a Trump administration would take
accountability very seriously. We wouldn't overlook that kind
of partisan politicization of the military workplace that I
believed we had experienced in the past years.
Senator Reed. Do you commit then to not take any action
against any individual military or civilian who carried out DOD
policy and regulations or implemented any laws enacted by
Congress?
Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, I think I heard all of the question.
I missed probably part of it, but the tenor was that asking of
me a commitment to not hold certain leaders accountable who
were following the law or implementing policy. In that vein, or
that spirit, or in principle, I'm only interested in holding
people accountable who don't follow the law and who don't honor
their oath to the Constitution, which I take very seriously.
Again, I'm very interested in nonpartisanship from our
uniform wearers in particular, and giving the right to the
American people to entertain their partisan arguments. But I
have no vindictive spirit. I'm not interested in retribution,
but I am interested, if confirmed, and looking forward in
making sure we have proper accountability and high standards in
the Department of the Air Force.
Senator Reed. Then you disavowed the statement you made in
October 2024, saying, if Trump takes over, there will be
consequences for people. Most of the consequences, I assume
would be targeted to people who you were had differences with
because of their support of the policies including equity and
other policies. Is that true, or you were just making up all
the stuff in your post in the last several years?
Mr. Lohmeier. Well, Senator, I'd love to look at the
context of all of the statements that I've made, but I will
make just one point that as I've contemplated the path to
confirmation or through the confirmation process, which I've
taken very seriously. I very much had in mind the social media
presence, podcast appearances, media appearances I've had for 4
years, and I've left every last jot and tittle of that up
online and available because I'm very deliberate in what I
choose to say.
I believe in what I say, and I also reserve the right to be
wrong about things and to change my opinion about things. But I
have nothing to hide. I try and speak what I believe to be
true, and I'm happy to be corrected about things in which I'm
mistaken. But in principle, what I was intending to say in that
post was that I believe accountability matters, and that's the
spirit of what I was trying to get at.
If confirmed, I'd look forward to ensuring we've got a
culture of accountability in the Department of the Air Force.
That was not intended to be retroactive or retribution in
nature, but simply intended to communicate that leaders who
prioritize accountability and high standards will do the
American people and servicemembers service by committing to
that.
Senator Reed. Well, I think we all want to see leaders who
are accountable themselves and also the highest standards, but
those standards have to be consistent with this country and the
servicemen and women who serve. They come from, as I indicated,
many races, many nationalities, different views, political, or
otherwise.
The goal is, as you indicated, is an apolitical military
force. Everything that I've read in your book and everything
else is far from apolitical. You've targeted individuals that
you felt had for political reasons unfortunate views. If you
carry that attitude into your job, you'll cause great confusion
in the Air Force and great animosity within the ranks, fear, et
cetera.
So, thank you for your previous service. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman. Or Senator Cotton, are you in charge?
Senator Cotton.
[Presiding.] Mr. Overbaugh, I see the intelligence and the
security shop in the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, not
just through my work on this committee, but my work on the as
chairman of the Intelligence Committee as well. I&S should be
the central advocate for the DODs intelligence priorities and
the central orchestrator to ensure that all defense
intelligence agencies are meeting DOD needs. Yet, it has often
seemed to me that all the agencies under the I&S umbrella
appear to largely act on their own accord. Oftentimes, it seems
a little direct oversight.
Can you commit to working with me on this committee and on
the Intelligence Committee to ensure that we improve I&S's
enterprise governance to meet the Defense--to make sure that
the Defense intelligence agencies are providing the
intelligence that all of our warfighters need?
Mr. Overbaugh. Yes, Senator. I absolutely can.
Senator Cotton. Thank you.
Do share that assessment that it seems like oftentimes
they're kind of all going off in their own direction?
Mr. Overbaugh. Senator, I share your concerns in that
regard, and what I can commit to you is, if confirmed for this
position, I would place an emphasis on ensuring that the entire
Defense, and intelligence, and security enterprise remains
responsive, particularly to combatant commanders and the
warfighters to ensure that they're well positioned to deal with
global threats.
Senator Cotton. Thank you.
I believe that part of the issue here is that I&S is not
optimally organized to meet that role of guiding the Defense
intelligence enterprise and advocating for Defense intelligence
priorities.
I put report language in last year's NDAA that mandated a
GAO review of the authorities, the roles and responsibility of
I&S. Can you commit to using the findings of that review to
inform any potential organizational changes that might be made
in I&S?
Mr. Overbaugh. Yes, Senator, and as I mentioned in my open
statement, I'm particularly concerned about bureaucratic
intransigence. So, analyzing the structure and process within
the organization would be a key focus, if I'm confirmed.
Senator Cotton. Thank you.
As is often the case, while boxes and lines on a chart are
important, they're not the only thing to consider. Sometimes,
it's not the most important thing that needs to change.
Sometimes, it is leadership and culture. I&S was dual headed as
the Director of Defense Intelligence and the principal director
or advisor to the Director of National Intelligence because
Congress recognized the urgent need for a single proponent to
ensure the broader national intelligence community meets
Defense requirements.
Yet, I don't think there's any documented processes or
procedures for ensuring that collaboration between I&S and the
ODNI, and I think the past interactions between ODNI and I&S
have not been adequate. Can you commit to working with Mr.
Hansell to make sure I&S is collaborating closely and
productively and constructively with the ODNI?
Mr. Overbaugh. I absolutely can, Senator, and this is
something that Mr. Hansell and I have already had an
opportunity to talk about. I share his passion, and I know that
if we're confirmed, we look very much forward to working with
ODNI, and Gabbard, and the rest of her team to ensure that that
lash up takes place.
Senator Cotton. Thank you.
To be clear, the work that the Defense intelligence
agencies produce, I think it's stellar and topnotch. It's often
some of the best intelligence reporting I see on this
committee, and especially on the Intelligence Committee. We
want to make sure that we're providing proper guidance for all
those agencies underneath your orbit. Also, that they're having
their proper influence within the broader intelligence
community, especially claims on resources.
Mr. Lohmeier the Air Force has been underfunded for a long
time, especially in the last two Democratic Administrations.
That's led to a dramatically smaller fighter force than we've
had at any times since World War II. Yet, we need air
superiority given the broad range of threats we face.
Do you commit to working with the Administration and with
Congress to be ensure that we increase resources going forward
for the Air Force and Space Force?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, Senator. I commit to that.
Senator Cotton. You agree that we need those additional
resources?
Mr. Lohmeier. I do agree.
Senator Cotton. Thank you.
Part of the problem we've had, too, is a shortage of
pilots. 1,800 pilot shortage across the total force. As of
Fiscal Year 2024, retention is only averaging about 40 to 50
percent. Do you agree that we need to focus very intently on
both recruiting and retaining pilots?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, Senator, and this is a problem we've had
for many years. It transcends Administrations, and I know that
Air Force leaders and Administrations have tried to fix this
problem. We try and throw money at the problem sometimes, and I
think that that tends, frankly, to keep in those who are
already probably on the fence and want to stay in any way. But
I talked to many pilots, they're interested in fixing their
quality of life and quality of service concerns as well. You
have my commitment to try and solve these problems.
Senator Cotton. The work I've done on this committee with
Senator King are just the same. They're always welcome the
money, but they don't join the Air Force, the Space Force for,
you know, a couple thousand dollars more a month. They join it
because they want to fly high-performance aircraft in defense
of our Nation.
One final question. The Ebbing Air National Guard Base in
Arkansas is home to a growing international fighter training
mission. We have 48 F-35 scheduled to be located at Ebbing over
the next 3 years. The Air Force has worked with Senator
Boozman, and Congressman Womack, and I, very well over the
years to get this critical mission bedded down. I assume you
agree that foreign military sales training remains a vital Air
Force mission.
Mr. Lohmeier. I do, Senator,
Senator Cotton. Thank you.
If confirmed, we can count on you to continue to ensure the
Air Force supports the mission in Ebbing, and has the resources
necessary to train our allies?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, Senator, you have my commitment that
I'll work very closely with the, with Dr. Meink, if he's
confirmed. Also, be very transparent in my comms with you about
the situation in your State.
Senator Cotton. Thank you. Senator Shaheen.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, gentlemen, for your past
service to the country, and for your willingness to continue to
serve. Welcome to all your families.
On Tuesday, Secretary Hegseth announced by tweet that he
was ending implementation of Women, Peace & Security at DOD,
claiming it was a Biden era, DEI policy. Unfortunately, he
missed the fact that President Trump and members of his current
Administration, including Secretary Rubio, Mike Waltz, and
Secretary Noem, all worked on this policy in 2017, and
President Trump signed it. U.S. combat units began using female
engagement teams during operations in Iraq and Afghanistan to
gather intelligence and build trust with local communities.
Years later, because of the success of those efforts, we
enshrined this concept into law as part of the WPS Act. Since
that time, WPS has been used by the warfighters to identify
victims of human trafficking and joint exercises on non-
combatant evacuations, to provide human intelligence on violent
extremist groups like ISIS and Al-Shabaab, and to understand
the human terrain to improve kinetic and non-kinetic targeting.
I'm very concerned that taking away these tools does not
make us a stronger or more lethal fighting force, and in fact,
it takes away some of the options we have to be successful.
Secretary Hegseth also claims that warfighters hate it, and
yet, the newly confirmed Chairman of the Joint Chiefs not only
told this committee about WPS's operational value, but he was
very clear that this is not DEI.
Lawfare made public in an article last night, a memo from
the Director of the Joint Staff providing their best military
advice to the Secretary, and this is a direct quote from that
article. Mr. Chairman, I would ask that the article be
introduced into the record.
[The information referred to follows:]
Chairman Wicker. [Presiding.] Without Objection.
Senator Shaheen. The article points out from that memo, and
I quote, ``China and Russia have no equivalent of WPS,'' and
that the combatant commands 80 engagements with partners over
the next 2 years under the program, ``counter China by gaining
access to a population China largely ignores.'' The director
continues that WPS, ``prevents radicalization by violent
extremist organizations and disrupts the smuggling of
narcotics, weapons, and humans into the United States.''
Officials from every combatant command and from several
other military components concurred with this recommendation
from the Joint chiefs. This is information that's not new to
this committee. Every four-star combatant commander has told us
about the strategic advantage that WPS provides to our forward
deployed forces.
So, Mr. Zimmerman, you're nominated to oversee regional
security for Europe, the Middle East, Africa, and the Western
Hemisphere. Don't you need all the tools that are available to
counter violent extremism in Africa and the Middle East? That's
a question.
Mr. Zimmerman. Senator, thank you very much for the
question. The violent extremism counterterrorism problem is a
major concern, and if confirmed to this role, one that I'll be
focused on. It does require, in my view, a whole-of-government
type of approach. Sometimes, we can be too siloed as a
government.
In my background in the intelligence community, I've had
the opportunity to work with many other inter-agency partners
and see the value that comes from across our government. If
confirmed to the role, I would of course make a priority to
work with all the tools and coordinate to make sure all the
tools are available.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
That argues in my mind for the importance of the WPS
effort. Mr. Overbaugh, you're nominated to oversee intelligence
functions for the Department of Defense. Again, if confirmed, I
assume that you would like all tools available to gather human
intelligence on the ground, especially in a conflict scenario?
Mr. Zimmerman. Every single one I can get, Senator.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
Mr. Lohmeier, you're nominated to be Under Secretary of the
Air Force. If confirmed, I assume your forward deployed airmen
will want to understand everything they can about the human
terrain before taking strikes, like on Houthis targets in
Yemen. Would you agree?
Mr. Zimmerman. I would agree with that, Senator.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman,
Chairman Wicker. Thank you very much. Senator Rounds.
Senator Rounds. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First of all, to all of you, thank you for your offer of
additional service to our country. Mr. Overbaugh, how would you
recommend addressing the evolving threats posed by near-peer
adversaries in the domains of cyber artificial intelligence in
space? It would appear to me that right now there is an
overarching challenge from multiple near-peer adversaries with
regard not just to airline and sea, but space and cyberspace.
The areas that you'll be overseeing include both cyberspace and
real space coordinated.
Talk to us a little bit about how you see your role in
terms of coordinating our response to those adversaries.
Mr. Overbaugh. Senator, thank you for the question. We've
already had a little bit of experience dealing particularly
with a soft space cyber triad. It's a critical effort because
as we continue to push into new domains to meet adversarial
threats across the globe, we have to stitch those domains
together in a way that achieves combined effects for the
warfighter and in defense of the American people.
As it relates to cyber threats that you mentioned, I am
concerned about the threats to our critical infrastructure, the
disinformation that can come through cyber threats, and also
zero-day exploits. I think some of our solutions in zero trust
architecture, active cyber defense, private-public
collaboration, and offensive cyber capabilities are tools that
would be able to bring to bear to meet those threats.
Space threats, the presence of ever increasingly
sophisticated ASAP weapons, particularly interested in space-
based surveillance of our enemies, as well as jamming, and
spoofing are of significant concern to me. I would look to
advocate from the position that I'm being nominated, resilience
and redundancy in our constellations, as well as ensuring
complete space domain awareness and encouraging commercial
partnerships to ensure that we're able to meet those threats
effectively.
Senator Rounds. One of the items Senator Cotton started on
this line of questioning a little bit, and I want to pursue a
little bit more, there clearly are stove pipes, some intended,
some unintended, with regard to the sharing of information
between Title 10 and Title 50 participants. But you've also
added another item in which is also critical, and that is the
private sector as well, which adds additional challenges.
Could you talk about what your role is in terms of making
sure that appropriate information is shared and that we make
the most out of the information that we do gather?
Mr. Overbaugh. Senator, I believe that the defense
intelligence and security enterprise has a role in ensuring
that we identify the threats accurately so that both public and
private entities can work effectively to design solutions to
deal with those threats as opposed to coming up with solutions
that don't match up with the threats that we face.
Senator Rounds. Thank you.
Mr. Zimmerman, look, I've got just one real quick question
for you, and that is basically right now, we've got the
possibility if we have one of our near-peer adversaries
confronting us in one theater, there's a very, very high
probability that we'll have a second near-peer adversary
confronting us in another theater.
How do you see your role in terms of coordinating with our
partners to make sure that we have the best advantages to be
able to deal with two threats in two different theaters?
Mr. Zimmerman. Senator, I appreciate the opportunity to
talk about this just for a moment. I think the threat that you
have articulated is one that requires utmost attention and
underscores the relevance of this Administration's emphasis on
partnering with allies, and for them to take greater ownership
and take seriously their need to boost Defense spending.
If confirmed to the role, one of the principal aspects of
the job, as I understand it, is to manage Defense relations in
the area of responsibility. If confirmed, I would do all I can
to partner effectively with allies and partners to ensure that
their security capabilities are at a level where we can have
the right posture to address the threat you're describing. So,
partnerships are extremely important, and if confirmed to the
role, I would take that seriously.
Senator Rounds. Thank you.
Mr. Lohmeier, the B-21 Raider coming online shortly,
probably one of the best and finest of the major projects out
there on time, on budget. Currently, we're coordinated to have
about 100 of them in. Clearly, that's not going to be enough.
Would you seriously consider any requests out there to increase
the number of B-21s that could be acquired by the Air Force as
the needs arise?
Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, this issue is also very important to
me. One of my priorities is going to be modernizing the nuclear
enterprise. Of course, the B-21 is an important piece to that,
and I understand that 100 B-21 program of record discussion to
be rather maybe a floor. I'm very open to discussing more.
Senator Rounds. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Wicker. Thank you. Senator Hirono.
Senator Hirono. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to ask each of you to respond very quickly to the
following two initial questions that I ask of all of the
nominees on any of the committees on which I sit. This goes to
fitness to serve, and we'll start with Mr. Lohmeier. Since you
became a legal adult, have you ever made unwanted request for
sexual favors, or committed any verbal or physical harassment,
or assault of a sexual nature?
[Witnesses answer in the negative.]
Senator Hirono. Have you ever faced discipline or entered
into a settlement relating to this kind of conduct?
[Witnesses answer in the negative.]
Senator Hirono. Before I get to my questions for Mr.
Lohmeier, let me be clear. Mr. Lohmeier, you were fired,
removed from command for going on a partisan podcast and
pushing political conspiracy theories while in uniform. Since
leaving Active Duty, you have spread divisive, harmful views on
race, equality, LGBTQ rights, and talked openly about seeking
retribution against those you perceived did you wrong. Exactly
the kinds of comments that undermine the unity and
professionalism of that our military depends on.
As if that wasn't bad enough, you're also a January 6th
conspiracy theorist, calling it, ``a government-led false flag
and hoax at the Capitol.'' I have deep concerns about your
nomination to be Under Secretary of the Air Force, and just as
much concern about what this nomination says to the members of
our military.
I'm very glad that Senator Shaheen asked of questions
relating to--by the way, that this is a comment to all of you
about the importance of WPS, and I'm glad that she pointed out
that this is a very useful tool that neither Russia nor China
have to combat extremism. To me, this is yet another example of
the obsession that this Administration has against a whole
swath of programs and efforts that this Administration deems
DEI.
So, I'll get to my questions. Mr. Lohmeier, I hope you can
answer these questions yes or no? Do you believe that January
6th attack on the Capitol, it was, ``a government-led false
flag operation''?
Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, let me begin by respectfully saying
that I believe you've mischaracterized me and my views. Now----
Senator Hirono. Excuse me----
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes.
Senator Hirono.--could you just respond to whether or not
you believe that that January 6th attack was a government-led
false flag operation? If you no longer believe that, just tell
me.
Mr. Lohmeier. I have never said exactly what you've just
attributed to me, but I will answer your question, Senator. I
believe that it's evident that there were, in fact, undercover
government agents at the Capitol on January 6th, but I have not
said exactly what you've said. I'm always careful the way I
characterize things.
Senator Hirono. Excuse me, my time is running out. You deny
saying it. Do you believe the January 6th attack on the Capitol
was a hoax?
Mr. Lohmeier. I've never used the word hoax, I believe, to
characterize the event. But what I have just stated, I do
believe, which is that there were most certainly----
Senator Hirono. So, excuse me, again, you deny saying that.
Oh, are you planning to reprise against, I know that Senator
Reed asked you some questions, but I want to actually name
names. Are you planning to reprise against General Whiting,
Major General Pepper, Colonel Fran, or any other Active
military servicemember for perceived slights against you?
Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, as I've said previously in the
hearing, I'm very focused on moving forward in the future, and
making sure that I hold people accountable for their----
Senator Hirono. Actually, that's why I'm asking you the
question. So, let me ask you this. If confirmed, will you
recuse yourself from initiating or being involved in any
administrative or personnel actions involving General Whiting,
General Pepper, and Colonel Fran, yes or no?
Mr. Lohmeier. I know two of the----
Senator Hirono. Will you recuse yourself?
Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, I know two of the individuals you've
mentioned. One of them is a combatant commander who I presume
has the trust and respect of the President of the United
States, and----
Senator Hirono. Could you just respond to my question,
please? I know you're taking up my time.
Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, I----
Senator Hirono. Will you recuse yourself against in any
actions that relate to these people that I just mentioned?
Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, what I will commit to is that I will
treat all people fairly according to the law, and I'll try and
do my job to the best of my duty, if I'm confirmed.
Senator Hirono. That is totally not reassuring. Thank you,
Mr. Chairman. I do have other questions for this nominee, for
the record.
Chairman Wicker. We'll have other rounds. Mr. Lohmeier, you
were beginning to say what you do believe about January the
6th. So, go ahead and finish that thought if you----
Mr. Lohmeier. Thank you, Senator. What I was saying is that
I believe there were many Americans who were gathered that day
as a part of a protest, and I also think it's been politically
fraught for many years, and it continues to be brought up
because there's so much uncertainty about what was really going
on. Totally outside of my lane as a nominee for the Under
Secretary of the Air Force. If confirmed, it's my job is to
organize training and equip forces to provide the combatant
commanders and the Air and Space Forces, and that's what I'd be
focused on.
Chairman Wicker. Okay. Senator Hirono, in light of my
intervention, do you have any followup question at this point?
Senator Hirono. No, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Wicker. Oh, okay. Thank you very much.
Senator Hirono. My only comment is that his refusal to
answer very clearly the questions does not reassure me at all
that he is qualified to take this position.
Chairman Wicker. Thank you, ma'am. Senator Ernst.
Senator Ernst. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thanks
to all of our witnesses for being here today, and for
continuing your service to these great United States of
America.
I do want to start--Mr. Lohmeier, we'll start and talk
about an issue that is extremely important to me and to all of
Iowa, and that is about our Air National Guard Refueling Wing,
located in Sioux City, Iowa. When the National Guard's 185th
Air refueling wing in Sioux City was converted from the F-16
fighters to the KC-135 tankers back in 2003, the Air Force said
it would upgrade the airfield at the Iowa National Guard
Facility. Again, this is 22 years ago. This is an important
issue. It is one I have pushed with the Air Force for a number
of years now. So, this line of questioning should be no
surprise.
Because the tankers require--they do have heavier
airframes, they have greater fuel loads that they will be
delivering. The runway is unable to hold that load. Okay? So,
this is critical importance. Unfortunately, the Air Force and
the National Guard never followed through on their promise to
upgrade that runway. They failed in their commitment to
complete the runway upgrade.
So, I am additionally concerned with this failure, because
now we have a conversion of the 135s to the KC-46s, and the
185th Air refueling Squadron could potentially lose its mission
because of the failure to upgrade this runway. It will directly
impact the retention of the immense talent of these guardsmen
in Sioux City. This is completely unacceptable, and the Air
Force must live up to its commitment as of 22 years ago.
So, Mr. Lohmeier, is the Air National Guard a vital
component of the Air Force?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, Senator. It is.
Senator Ernst. Is it essential that the Air National Guard
has the infrastructure and resources necessary to execute its
missions effectively?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes. Every time the Guard comes up, Senator,
I often reflect on the fact that when I was an F-15 fighter
pilot, I never even knew what unit happened to be providing
fuel to me on the tanker in front of me. There's such a
seamless integration between our Active Duty reserve and guard
personnel. I think this is a very important issue.
Senator Ernst. Absolutely, and I appreciate that. If
confirmed, do I have your commitment unequivocally, that you
will fully fund the runway upgrade at the Iowa National Guard
facility in Sioux City, and ensure it's at the top of the Air
National Guard MILCON priorities for the fiscal year 26 NDAA?
Mr. Lohmeier. Well, Senator, like you, I don't like it when
people make commitments and can't keep them. I think it's
important to the trust of the American people, and it's
important for the Air Force to keep its commitments. So, I'm
familiar with the history that you've laid out.
Unlike perhaps those that have gone before, I'll commit a
little bit differently to you, that I'll be very transparent in
my communications with you. I'll take this particular issue
very seriously, and I want to make sure that if I make
commitments to you or to the American people, that I'll be able
to follow through, or the Department of the Air Force will be
able to follow through. That is, so I'll take that very
seriously.
Senator Ernst. That is disappointing, though, Mr. Lohmeier.
I think I heard a commitment to Senator Cotton about his home
State priority. I am asking for a commitment for my home State
priority. The very mission of this unit relies upon an upgrade
of its runway. So, this is very problematic for me. I have been
bringing this up with the Air Force for years now.
I'm asking that a commitment be honored for our Iowa Air
National Guard and the community that supports this National
Guard Unit. So, given the lack of commitment around this
project and its direct impact on the 185th's ability to perform
its mission, I want to make sure we're not putting the cart
before the horse.
So, again, Mr. Lohmeier, I'll give you a second chance
here. Can I at least have your commitment that you will work
with the Secretary of the Air Force to pause any discussion on
changing the 185th Air Refueling Wing's mission set?
Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, yes, you have my commitment that I
will, if confirmed, work very closely with Dr. Meink, if he's
confirmed, to carefully make data-driven decisions and consider
all variables. I don't think these are decisions that should
ever be taken lightly. I certainly don't like that we can't
follow through with commitments that we've made.
So, I make the same commitment to you that I've made to
Senator Cotton, or that I'd be willing to make with any Senator
in this room, that I'll weigh each matter in a nonpolitical
manner, try and make the best decisions for the Force. Of
course, I'm very interested, Senator, as you suggested, in
honoring the commitments that the Department of the Air Force
has made in the past where that's feasible. I'd look forward to
learning more about that.
Senator Ernst. Thank you, Mr. Lohmeier.
I want to be clear. This isn't just about the runway. It's
about whether our Air National Guard is treated as an equal
partner, as you stated earlier, international defense, or as an
afterthought. Unfortunately, they have been treated as an
afterthought. The Iowa's 185th has served with honor, and they
absolutely deserve infrastructure that matches their
operational demands. I'm going to continue to press on this,
and I hope that I have resolution in the near future. We need
to make sure these commitments are honored. Thank you, Mr.
Chair.
Chairman Wicker. Senator Kaine.
Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and to the witnesses,
congratulations for your nominations.
There's a beautiful phrase in the New Testament in both the
Gospels of Luke and Matthew that goes something like this; From
the fullness of the heart, the mouth speaks. Mr. Lohmeier, I
want to ask you about your very active mouth and what it
reveals about your heart, your tweeting.
I'll just give you a few examples. August 9th, 2024, ``The
left lies about nearly everything it does, and tens of millions
of Americans believe the lies.'' So, trashing the left and
calling tens of millions of Americans, dupes. August 2d, 2024,
``If today, you're wondering why the left and Mit Romney seem
to have entirely lost any semblance of a moral compass,
Vladimir Lenin provides you the answer.'' April 1st, 2023, ``Of
all that is good and decent, the left is the real oppressor.''
But the one I want to ask you about is the one that Senator
Hirono asked you about, and she read you an excerpt. I'll read
the whole thing. A tweet from August 9th, 2024, ``Picked this
up in my basic exchange at Buckley Air Force Base, several
weeks after J6. This is what the Biden/Harris administration
ushered in after a government-led false flag and hoax at the
Capitol. They immediately demonized the men and women in
uniform. Then they purge conservatives and Christians with
their shot mandates. Brilliant planning, actually.''
Tell me what the phrase that you wrote, ``government-led
false flag and hoax at the Capitol.'' What does that mean with
reference to January 6th?
Mr. Lohmeier. Thanks for bringing this up again, Senator. I
like the verses that you've read. I agree that it matters a
great deal that we try and speak truthfully. I'll remind you,
respectfully, that the comments that I made that you've just
shared, were shared on my X account, I presume, while I was a
private citizen in this country in 2024. I'd been out of
uniform for 3 years. In fact, with absolutely no intention of
returning to public service, I was quite enjoying private life
and being able to criticize people as I wish.
Senator Kaine. So, they were a sincere reflection of what
you had in your heart at the time?
Mr. Lohmeier. Well, in as much as those statements were
properly contextualized, and I can't speak to the context from
which you've read. I always do try and speak honestly, and
again, reserve the right to be wrong about any of my views.
That is----
Senator Kaine. But how about just the phrase. With respect
to January 6th, what does your phrase, a government-led false
flag and hoax at the Capitol.
Mr. Lohmeier. Let me share, too, that I while I do
recognize the other quotes that you've read, I don't recall
having written those words that you've just read about January
6th. So that could be partly a memory problem. It could be that
I retweeted something and that quote has been pulled, but I
don't recall using that phrase.
What I do believe is that private citizens in this country
can have the right to express their views as mean or as wrong
as they might be, and that the men and women in uniform defend
the right of the private citizen to speak those views. That my
concern while I was in uniform was in fact that the kind of
partisan rhetoric that I had used, that you've just quoted
from, for example, was actually being inserted into the
military workplace in a way that divides troops.
So, I was trying to hold our military, cultural, and
workplace environment accountable to a standard of
nonpartisanship, as I've indicated, so that we could thrive in
unity and not division. Now, private citizens have the right to
say this.
Senator Kaine. I completely agree. Private citizens have
the right to say and believe whatever they want. This is a
hearing about your qualifications for the position. The
qualifications are essentially, in my view, a mixture of three
things; background, character, and judgment. It's about
judgment. I don't want to confirm somebody into the Pentagon
who would fall for a conspiracy theory that a fourth grader
would find incredible.
If I searched your social media, and I saw you praising the
Great Pumpkin over and over again, you would have the right to
have that view. But I wouldn't want somebody who believed in
the Great Pumpkin to be in the position that you're nominated
for. So, if I'm thinking about people in the military. I know
Virginia has an awful lot of people in the military. One of my
kids is in the military. There are people in the military who
are left, right, center, and maybe even more who are completely
disinterested in politics, and we got crazy.
But how would somebody who's in the left, or considers
themself in the left serving in the Air Force, when you say the
left lies about nearly everything it does, of all that is good
and decent, the left is the real oppressor. How would any
person who identifies that way feel any confidence that you as
a leader would have their back?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, Senator. I think it's a great question.
It's one I actually share your concern for and care greatly
about. Let me just share briefly in a 10-second answer. That at
the time that I departed from Active Duty, I had young men and
women in uniform of all racial or ethnic backgrounds, certainly
different political backgrounds coming to me privately, sending
me notes and saying, ``Sir, I never knew what your political
worldview was. I don't understand completely why you've chosen
to now take a stand for these issues or write about what you
did, but I respect you as a leader.'' If confirmed, I'd be
happy to come back----
Senator Kaine. My time has run over, but I'll just--in
yielding back to the, to the chairman. I don't know where you
were on January 6th. Most of us were here. A lot of us had a
friend, a guy named Howie Liebengood, who was a Capitol Police
Officer who died as a result of January 6th, whose widow Serena
is one of my constituents.
When I hear somebody, anybody talk about what happened here
as a false flag or a hoax, it's insulting to those of us who
were here. It's particularly insulting to those who lost loved
ones that day. I yield back.
Senator Scott. [Presiding.] Senator Sullivan.
Senator Sullivan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Lohmeier, I'm going to cover kind of the topics that
you and I talked about in my office a couple days ago. First of
all, I like to ask nominees, maybe I'll ask all of you. Billy
Mitchell was testifying in front of the--I think it was Senate
Armed Services Committee, the father of the U.S. Air Force in
the mid 1930's. He was talking about a certain place in the
world. He called it the most strategic place on the planet, and
whoever controlled that place would control the world. Mr.
Lohmeier, I'll start with you. As an Air Force guy, you know
where Billy Mitchell was talking about?
Mr. Lohmeier. I do, Senator.
Senator Sullivan. What place was he talking about?
Mr. Lohmeier. It was the State of Alaska.
Senator Sullivan. Great. Can I get that confirmation from
the two other witnesses?
Mr. Overbaugh. Yes, Senator, you can.
Mr. Zimmerman. Yes, Senator.
Senator Sullivan. Most strategic place in the world. Great.
Good. You guys are starting out really well here. Thank you,
and our adversaries, also see it as quite strategic.
[The information referred to follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Sullivan. This is a depiction of the Russian and
Chinese incursions into our ADIZ and into our EEZ in the last
two and a half years. I'm going to flip that over and show you
the numbers. It's like several.
That's in the last two and a half years. Pretty remarkable.
Doesn't make a lot of news in the Lower 48, our airspace,
northern airspace. The green, the green ones are depictions of
joint strategic bomber task forces and joint United States--or
I'm sorry, Russia, Chinese naval incursion. So, they're doing
joint ops in the Northern Pacific and Alaska. Just a couple--2
weeks ago.
So, Mr. Lohmeier, I want--you're a former F-15 pilot. Can
you put the other slide up? When you do an intercept mission,
say from Alaska, how tough are those missions? Our guys do them
all the time. Every one of those incursions, we intercepted
them with F-22s, F-16s, F-35. How tough of a mission if you're
flying from JBER or Eielson Air Force Base out to the ADIZ
here, is that a tough mission?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, Senator. The seat in the F-15 and even
in our newest fighters, isn't comfortable when you're spending
hours in there hitting the tanker multiple times.
Senator Sullivan. So, you're hitting a tanker probably four
or five times just to go do the intercept. Correct?
Mr. Lohmeier. Correct.
Senator Sullivan. Sometimes, in the middle of the night, in
February, you're doing an intercept up there. If you're in a
single engine F-16 intercepting Russian Bear Bombers in the
middle of the night in February, and you got to punch out, you
lose an engine, how likely are you going to survive in that----
Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, those are incredibly high-risk
missions, and we've got great men and women who put their necks
on the line every day doing just exactly what you've described.
Especially if you're having to punch out in that environment,
you're not in a good position.
Senator Sullivan. No. So, what the NORTHCOM Commander and
the INDOPACOM Commander and even the CNO of the Navy has said
we need more infrastructure up here to support these missions
because they keep saying we're going to--the Russians and
Chinese are going to keep doing this even more. So, would you
work with me and this committee on those goals? We're looking
at Adak as a Navy Base with two 8,000-foot airstrips. We're
looking at a hangar up at Utqiagvik, that's Barrow, to be able
to station search and rescue operations, or Galena, that was a
former Air Force Base.
Would you work with me and this committee on looking at
that kind of infrastructure that can support the men and women
in Alaska who are literally on the front lines of great power
competition doing these kinds of missions. You know, just a
couple weeks ago, hard missions. Our military up in Alaska do
such a great job. But can you support me in this committee in
working on those infrastructure projects that the two combatant
commanders in this region INDOPACOM and NORTHCOM have testified
that they need?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, Senator. I share your interest in this
area. This is in many respects a cornerstone of our projection
of power into the Indo-Pacific Theater. You have my commitment
to work very closely with you on what the Secretary and I are
trying to do from a basing perspective, an infrastructure
perspective in the Department of the Air Force, if confirmed.
Senator Sullivan. Let me ask one final question. The
secretary nominee in his testimony also committed to me, the
Air Force has committed to me and this committee for about
eight or 9 years now to get more tankers up at Eielson. The
last Secretary of the Air Force did, the previous Secretary of
the Air Force did, Democrats, Republicans.
Can you commit to me, as the Secretary just did, to work to
get the four KC-135s that they've been promising these brave
men and women who need tanking capacity to go do these
intercepts, real-world missions. No. 2, can you work with me
and commit to me to getting those four KC-135s up to Eielson?
Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, if confirmed, I commit to you that I
will work to ensure that the commitments that Dr. Meink has
made are fulfilled.
Senator Sullivan. Great. Thank you very much. Thank you,
Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Wicker. [Presiding.] Thank you, Senator Sullivan.
Senator Blumenthal.
Senator Blumenthal. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Lohmeier, the role of Under Secretary of Air Force is
not a platform for ideology or grievance. It's a demanding
leadership position that's responsible for overseeing a budget,
personnel, institutional integrity. It requires a strategic
vision, and really importantly, managerial experience. That is
to say, hands-on experience managing a major organization.
I'm at a loss to see what in your background qualifies you
to lead or actually run the Air Force when you've never led an
organization that approaches this one at anything like the
scale and scope of what you would be expected to do, if you're
confirmed.
Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, thanks for the opportunity to
address that. As I mentioned in my opening statement, I've
spent time in both the Air Force and the Space Force. I was
trusted to be an aircraft commander on the $50 million F-15
Eagle air superiority fighter, and then later was placed in
command of our $18 billion space-based architecture a decade
ago. In fact, that was my first foray into working with program
managers, acquisition experts.
Senator Blumenthal. Well, what is the largest number of
people under your direct responsibility that you've----
Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, at the time that I finished my
career, I was a squadron commander, and we had just over 100
people in our unit.
Senator Blumenthal. 100?
Mr. Lohmeier. That's right.
Senator Blumenthal. How many will you be responsible for if
you are confirmed?
Mr. Lohmeier. The Department of the Air Force is
approximately 700,000 Active Duty guard, reserve, and civilian
personnel.
Senator Blumenthal. So, 100 versus 700,000. How long were
you in charge of that squadron?
Mr. Lohmeier. I was a squadron commander for 1 year,
Senator.
Senator Blumenthal. One year. Is that the standard length
of time?
Mr. Lohmeier. It is not.
Senator Blumenthal. Why was it shorter?
Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, it was cut short when I was relieved
of my command for publishing a book that's been mentioned in
this hearing that was advocating for a return to an apolitical
military workplace instead of dividing troops along political
ideological lines.
Senator Blumenthal. So, this is very strikingly reminiscent
of what we've heard before in these confirmation hearings,
seemingly for the Secretary of Defense who, also in effect, was
relieved of his responsibility when he was running a veterans
organization, and in effect, ran it into the ground, which
should have been a warning for all of us, as it was for me and
others on the committee, about lack of managerial experience
being potentially a really grave pitfall. I'm very fearful that
we are going to see the same in others in the Department of
Defense. There's no room for managerial misguidance or
mistakes.
Again, let me ask you, what in your experience qualifies
you for this job?
Mr. Lohmeier. Thank you. I agree with you and share your
concern. We have no room in the--at this critical time with the
threats that we face for our service, secretaries and our under
secretaries, to mismanage, to break the law, to not take the
priorities of an Administration appropriately seriously.
In fact, we need real leaders in place to make hard
decisions about budgets and acquisition processes, major
defense programs. We need them to make hard decisions about the
nuclear modernization efforts that we have underway. If
confirmed, I'll take that very seriously. I'm a fast learner,
and I'll surround myself with experts, including Dr. Meink, if
he's confirmed, to try and solve those problems for the
Department of Air Force.
Senator Blumenthal. Would you use Signal to----
Mr. Lohmeier. I do use Signal, Senator?
Senator Blumenthal. To talk to others in the Department of
Defense or the National Security establishment about the plans
for pilots in the Air Force to do military missions?
Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, one of the things I've become quite
good at over my 15-and-a-half-year career in the Air Force and
Space Force is understanding very well that there are sensitive
and classified materials that should only be discussed in
appropriate platforms. We have appropriate platforms and
mediums for those communications.
Senator Blumenthal. So, the answer is no?
Mr. Lohmeier. Signal is an unclassified messaging app just
like other apps, although it's end-to-end encrypted. So, if
confirmed, that's something you need to take very seriously in
those roles. Yes, Senator,
Senator Blumenthal. Is your answer no?
Mr. Lohmeier. My answer is that I would----
Senator Blumenthal. Would you use Signal?
Mr. Lohmeier. I'll abide by the law, and I'll make sure
that any sensitive or classified communications are
accomplished on the appropriate mediums.
Senator Blumenthal. This is a yes or no answer.
You would not use Signal, I assume from your answer, yes or
no?
Mr. Lohmeier. I will use Signal for private discussions
that are unclassified with friends or colleagues as I always
have.
Senator Blumenthal. So, you would not use it to discuss
missions that pilots in the Air Force? You're going to be----
Mr. Lohmeier. Correct.
Senator Blumenthal.--the Under Secretary of the Air Force,
if----
Senator Blumenthal.--you're confirmed----
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes. Easy commitment, Senator.
Senator Blumenthal.--would be flying in hostile territory,
such as those pilots were when the Secretary of Defense used
Signal on two occasion to communicate about those highly
sensitive, confidential, potentially dangerous missions,
putting pilots at risk. You wouldn't do it. Correct?
Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, you have my commitment. I will not
use Signal to discuss those things.
Senator Blumenthal. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Wicker. Thank you very much. Senator Scott.
Senator Scott. Thank you, Chairman.
Well, first off, congratulations on your nominations. Your
jobs are going to be exciting. It's going to be an--it's an
exciting time to be part of building and making sure we have a
great military. So, you guys are--you're all three going to do
a great job.
So, I just I didn't know I was supposed to come and ask for
a military base in my State, but I've got one that's important,
Homestead. But anyway, I just got back from Europe, and this
has been consistent for--since I've been up here. As I talk to
allies, they complain. They complain about two things. That
they are trying to buy our equipment. They complain about the,
I guess, foreign military sales process to get approval from
the government. Then, they complain about they can't get the
equipment quickly because our defense contractors are not on
time.
So, Mr. Zimmerman, can you talk about what you think we can
do, and what you plan on doing to make it easier to make a
decision? Because I just--we were just in Denmark, Finland, and
Estonia, the two that we had the conversation with, all three
of them, but a lot of it they don't understand when they are
ally and they can't get an answer.
I'm a business guy. What frustrates me about the government
is just give me a stupid answer. Because if you tell them no,
that they can go to Israel, they can go to South Korea, they
can go to other places and buy some of the equipment they need.
But if it's just a black hole, that doesn't make any sense.
Mr. Zimmerman. Senator from my understanding from the
issue, I think I share your frustration and understand why
allies have thoughts about the process. If confirmed to the
role, I understand that the way in which I would be connected
to the FMS process is an advising role, and particularly
looking at prioritization in both with our European allies.
Here we are in a situation dealing with an underinvestment
in the defense industrial base over the last several years that
has limited the supply of what they need. So, that's a
challenge, but I would give my best advice, if confirmed, to
the Secretary and Under Secretary about how to prioritize
allied security needs through the FMS system.
Senator Scott. So, you might not be involved in this, but
it's my understanding that with our defense contractors, we pay
for them to develop a product, and then they own the IP for
that product. Is that true, or do you know?
Mr. Zimmerman. Senator, I don't know the answer to that. I
would like to get back to you about that.
Senator Scott. Does that make sense? Just off the top of
your head? Did that make much sense? If we for it, if our
government pays for it with our taxpayer dollars, they own the
IP?
Mr. Zimmerman. It sounds like if true, it might be one of
the challenges in the program.
Senator Scott. So, what do you think we can do to get our
defense contractors to fulfill the obligations that they've
committed to? Because we hear this all from our allies all over
the world; that our defense contractors are not meeting, not
just with their commitments to us on time, but commitments to
our allies for equipment that they need to make sure they can
defend, which is exactly what President Trump wants them to do,
be able to defend themselves first.
Mr. Zimmerman. Senator, it's a great question, and if
confirmed, I would do all that I could within the scope of the
ISA portfolio and how it touches on FMS to ensure that the
process is as painless and seamless as possible. It is very
important for our allies and for the Administration's goal of
burden sharing to have an efficient FMS process.
Senator Scott. Okay. Thanks. You-all three are going to do
a great job. Thanks, Chairman.
Chairman Wicker. Thank you, Senator Scott. Senator King is
next, and he is graciously yielded to Senator Kelly. So,
Senator Kelly, you're recognized.
Senator Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Senator King. Mr. Lohmeier, you recently made a
post that seemed to indicate Russia was justified in its
invasion of Ukraine because Russia feared NATO expansion. This
isn't just untrue. It's also the exact kind of misinformation
that Russia pushed to justify them rolling troops and tanks
across the border into Ukraine and bombing Ukrainian cities.
So, Mr. Lohmeier, I want to be very direct here. In your
opinion, was Russia justified in its invasion of Ukraine?
Mr. Lohmeier. Thanks, Senator Kelly, for taking the time to
meet with me a week and a half ago. In answer to your question,
I'll say as directly back as I can as well, and in respect, I
don't believe I used the word justified in my post. However, I
am a bit of a historian. I like context, and what I've always
said publicly is that all heads of State have to make
determinations for their own security. So, when I say something
like that, whether it's with Vladimir Putin or any head of
State, I'm saying that they are entitled to make those
decisions whether we agree with them or not.
Now, it's a bit outside of the lane of the Under Secretary
of the Air Force, of course, whose role as the chief management
officer will be to organize training and equip forces for the
fight in--for any given Administration to meet combat and
commander needs?
Senator Kelly. Well, I'll give you that. That the post did
not say that. But you did post an article by John Mearsheimer
that said why the Ukraine crisis is the West's fault. You did
not say that was your opinion. So, I'm going to ask you the
question, again. In your opinion, was Russia justified in its
invasion of Ukraine?
Mr. Lohmeier. For context, which always, of course,
Senator, as you aware, matters a great deal. That was an
article that was written by John Mearsheimer, an international
relations scholar, in 2014. It was a comment about Russia's
annexation of Crimea in 2014, and some of the history leading
up to that. It was not an article that had any bearing upon
what happened in the decade that followed, per se, but it was
an international relation's academic piece that talked about
the annexation of Crimea.
His opinion in that article, and this is a very insightful
article, in fact, traces through the history of native
expansion since it was created. It's, again, an academic piece.
It's something that we study at strategy----
Senator Kelly. Crimea was part of Ukraine. In my view,
still is part of Ukraine.
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, Senator, and the point I just make in
bringing that up is that the opinion that was shared in that
post about that article had to do with past conflict and
implications for the ways in which allies interact on the world
stage and how that influences the decisions that heads of State
make. It was not in any way intended to excuse the behavior of
any head of State, including President Putin.
Senator Kelly. So, now I've got two questions. So, the
title of the paper was, ``Why the Ukraine Crisis Is The West
Fault.'' Do you agree with that premise?
Mr. Lohmeier. It's an enticing title. Again, it was
pertaining to decisions that were being made a decade prior to
the conflict that you're asking about. It's an incredibly
informative academic work that is based in international
relations theory. I very much like the paper and would still
recommend to people today if they're interested in
understanding the conflict in the region. It's a rich resource
of information.
Senator Kelly. Do you agree that the Ukraine crisis is the
West's fault?
Mr. Lohmeier. No, because that's far too simplistic. Again,
global politics is a messy and complicated affair. What I will
say is that it's very clear, a couple of years ago, Russia
invaded Ukraine, and Ukraine's been on the defense of trying to
fight that war. Of course, it's had bipartisan support in this
Congress.
Senator Kelly. So, was Russia justified in invading
Ukraine?
Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, with respect, I've not said that.
Senator Kelly. Well, that's why I'm asking you the
question.
Mr. Lohmeier. I know you are, and I really--the reason I'm
hesitating shouldn't be taken or interpreted to imply and
answer one way or the other. I really--I like context. I don't
like yes and nos, and I don't like soundbite media. I'll say
that I believe that heads of State retain the right to make
decisions on who they'll go to war with. That's not something I
decide. That's not something even the United States or its
leaders get to decide even as much as we want to weigh in on
those positions. I can say, though, for certainty that I'm
grateful----
Senator Kelly. But it sounds like you think it's okay for
one of our adversaries to invade one of our allies.
Mr. Lohmeier. I did not say that. What I will say is that
I'm grateful that there are currently efforts underway by this
Administration to try and seek a peaceful resolution of that
conflict. I think it's time that it ended.
Senator Kelly. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
Chairman Wicker. Senator Tuberville.
Senator Tuberville. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you,
gentlemen, for willingness to serve.
Mr. Zimmerman, since March 15th, CENTCOM has forces that
have conducted a sustained campaign targeting the Houthis
terrorist organization in Yemen to restore freedom of
navigation in American deterrence. As of April 27th, CENTCOM
has struck over 800 targets. These targets have killed hundreds
of Houthis' fighters and numerous Hootie leaders, including
Senior Hootie Missile and UAV officials. Mr. Zimmerman, in your
assessment, have U.S. operations against the Houthis been a
success?
Mr. Zimmerman. Senator, I support the Administration's
forcible approach toward the Houthis beginning in the early
days of the Administration with the executive order that called
for the elimination of the threat of the Houthis with allies
and designating them as a foreign terrorist organization. I
don't think I have access to the, to the classified information
that I would like to have to make an assessment about the
efficacy of the strikes, but I support what the Administration
is trying to do.
Senator Tuberville. Thank you.
Mr. Overbaugh, one of the organizations you'll help
oversee, if you are confirmed, is the Missile and Space
Intelligence Center, we call MSIC, which is a component of DIA,
and located in my State at Huntsville, Alabama. MSIC provides a
world-class analysis on the performance of foreign weapons
systems, which is critical to ensuring our warfighters dominate
the battlefield against our adversaries.
Mr. Overbaugh, are you familiar with MSIC and MSIC's
analysis? If so, can you talk a little bit about how important
this mission is?
Mr. Overbaugh. Senator, I am familiar with MSIC, and
particularly their role in feeding quality intelligence into
other entities like DIA, to ensure that we have an accurate
threat picture. I think even more important is the potential
for MSIC to play a key role in ensuring we understand the
adversarial threat as it relates to ensuring that our Golden
Dome is as effective as it possibly can be.
Senator Tuberville. Have you had the opportunity to visit
MSIC headquarters in Huntsville?
Mr. Overbaugh. Huntsville, yes. MSIC, no, not yet, Senator.
Senator Tuberville. Thank you. Hope you get too soon. Thank
you.
Mr. Lohmeier, you have an absolutely outstanding, unique
career path as a respect to military officer. Thank you for
your service. You've got a breadth of experience in both the
Air Force and Space Force, which is very uncommon, but none of
those experiences were in managing large budgets. Why should
you be trusted now with such a heavy responsibility at a time
when we are taking fiscal responsibility more seriously, thank
goodness, than ever before, and while there is a growing demand
from the American people that we have a clean audit of the
Defense Department?
Mr. Lohmeier. Thanks, Senator. I'm glad I get to readdress
this. While it's true that I don't personally have extensive
experience with a large budget in an organization or
acquisition experience, I have sound judgment. I've
demonstrated it throughout my life. I'm a fast learner.
Secretary Meink, if he's confirmed, has demonstrated that
you can pass 16 or 17 clean audits at the National
Reconnaissance Office. He'll be a phenomenal leader to work
with on this problem in the Department of the Air Force. What I
can say is that we've got exceptional professionals who have
been trying Administration after Administration to solve our
budget problems, our acquisition problems in the Department of
the Air Force. Many of them have had extensive acquisition and
budgeting experience. But that doesn't mean you're able to
solve the problems well.
So, if confirmed, what I can commit to this committee and
to the American people is that I'm interested in making data-
driven decisions. I'm interested in exercising keen judgment,
discernment about these budget decisions, and coming to the
right decisions that I believe the American people will be
grateful for and trust. Doing that in concert with Secretary
Meink in support of the President's priorities and in support
of the Secretary of Defense's priorities.
Senator Tuberville. Thank you.
Your knowledge will be very important moving into space.
You have a lot of experience in that area. We look forward to
working with you in that area because as we know, it's going to
be a much, much more important part of our military in the very
near future. Thank you, gentlemen. Look forward to confirming
you.
Chairman Wicker. Thank you, Senator Tuberville. I would
mention to members a vote is going on on the floor. I think we
can possibly finish this hearing before that vote ends. Senator
King.
Senator King. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Lohmeier, I deeply respect your career in the Air Force
and the Space Force. But to followup on Senator Tuberville's
question, my concern is that the Air Force, and particularly
your position, is going to be responsible for two-thirds of the
modernization of the nuclear triad. The Sentinel piece is
looking like the most consequential civil works project that
the Pentagon or perhaps in this whole country has ever
undertaken. It's already in a Nunn-McCurdy breach.
So, I'm not satisfied with saying you're data-driven, and
you're going to hire good people. My concern is, I mean, you're
the boss, and you would be, if you're confirmed. I'm just
uncomfortable. I'm not talking about past tweets or books or
anything else. I'm talking about the future, and that is the
management of probably the most complex and important defense
project that's ever been undertaken by the Pentagon.
Try to reassure me. I mean, a great center fielder for the
Red Sox is not necessarily qualified to be general manager.
Your service is important, but you're talking--we're talking
about these critically important acquisitions projects that are
intensely managerial. Try to reassure me, if you can.
Mr. Lohmeier. Well, thank you, Senator. I agree with your
concern. I share your concern for the criticality of the
Sentinel Program, concern over the Nunn-McCurdy breach that's
experienced. Modernization of the nuclear enterprise is, of
course, a priority of mine. So, here's the way in which I can
try and reassure you, as I have throughout the rest of the
hearing.
I've been entrusted throughout my entire career with both
leadership of men and women in uniform, as well as being
entrusted with safeguarding and employing exceptionally
exquisite and expensive weapon systems, both in the Air Force,
in the F-15C and in the space-based infrared system, the space-
based missile warning architecture, an $18 billion
architecture. I've worked with acquirers' program managers in
that process.
This is not a question of whether or not someone has had
the qualifications before to manage the Defense Department,
because who in their most human beings have never had that
experience? In fact, this is a question of scale or scope, and
I'll say that I've always been faithful to the trust that's
been committed to me, even though the scale has been much
smaller.
I'll say, humbly, that I believe I'm up to this challenge.
I'm well qualified for this job. I'm air-minded and space-
minded, and I understand very well the threats, especially that
we face from our peer competitor in China, and so, thank you.
That's my best attempt to say, Senator. I'm grateful for the
opportunity, but I'm also humbled by it, and very concerned
about it as well. I look forward, if confirmed, to doing my
utmost very best to manage those very serious programs.
Senator King. I appreciate that.
Mr. Overbaugh, every time, and I like Senator Cotton, I
also serve on the Intelligence Committee. To me, the most
important quality for any intelligence official is the
willingness to tell the truth to the boss, even if it isn't
what they want to hear. Dan Coats, former DNI, said the job of
the intelligence community is to find the truth and tell the
truth.
Will you commit to me that you are willing to walk into the
Oval Office or walk into the office of the Secretary of Defense
and say this is the intelligence that we have about this
particular problem that contradicts the policy desires of the
President or the Secretary, or the Head of the Joint Chiefs?
Mr. Overbaugh. Senator, I can absolutely commit to that. I
agree with you wholeheartedly, that seeking the truth is one of
the most important, if not the most important components of an
intelligence professional's job.
Senator King. If you look back on recent history, some of
our real disasters have been caused by slanted, or what I call,
cooked intelligence. That's to be avoided. Simple question. Did
Russia start the war in Ukraine by invading?
Mr. Overbaugh. Senator, it's a military fact that Russia
invaded Ukraine in February 2022.
Senator King. Thank you.
There's one challenge about intelligence that we've
learned, particularly in Afghanistan, and then again in
Ukraine, and that is the analysis of the will to fight of a
population. We blew it in both cases. We overestimated the
Afghan's will to fight, and had the disaster of the end of that
war. Then, we did not--we underestimated the Ukrainian's will
to fight, and all the intelligence was that it would--you know,
the Russian would be in Kyiv in 2 weeks.
I challenge you, and I know the Department has done serious
work on this, to pay attention to that because that, for
example, will be a factor in our policy decision about Taiwan.
So, it's not an easy question. It's not as easy as counting
tanks from a satellite, but it's nonetheless an incredibly
important intelligence challenge. So, I hope that's something
you'll pay some attention to.
Mr. Overbaugh. Senator, I will, and apologize, I see that
we're over time, but I do want to address this. I mentioned it
in my opening statement about the importance of evaluating and
questioning the assumptions that we use to make the assessments
that we make, and examining the frameworks to determine how
much they are may be influenced by personal bias or
bureaucratic bias, political influence, or any other type of
interference, which would inhibit our ability to provide our
decisionmakers with the very best picture of adversarial threat
to include, which I personally think is one of the most
important components of enemy capability is will to fight.
Senator King. Thank you.
Find the truth and tell the truth. That's what we're
looking for. Mr. Zimmerman. I'll submit some questions for the
record.
Chairman Wicker. Thank you very much, Senator. Senator
Budd.
Senator Budd. Thank you, Chairman, and, again,
congratulations to each of you. Thanks for the family and
friends to be here today.
Mr. Lohmeier, are you familiar with the strategic basing
process?
Mr. Lohmeier. Somewhat, Senator.
Senator Budd. Okay, great.
Last month, the Department of Air Force transmitted its
plan to Congress for the sustainment and recapitalization of
the Air National Guard fighter fleet. Now, it was the result of
much analysis and careful planning. It's this document right
here. Have you had a chance to read this?
Mr. Lohmeier. I have not, Senator.
Senator Budd. Selfridge Air National Guard Base in
Michigan, is receiving 15 EXs, and that is not part of this
plan, which I can guess will change things for the Air Force's
frontline units. Not the Guard units, but the frontline units.
So, as an example, Seymour Johnson will have to train these A-
10 pilots on the platform of the F-15 and the mission using
their F-15 Eagles. You flew the F-15, correct?
Mr. Lohmeier. C models. Yes, Senator.
Senator Budd. Well, that's a large unplanned increase in
flying training compared to the simulator-based differences
training for transitioning currently qualified F-15 pilots to
the EX model. So, I want to paraphrase a statement from the Air
Force about the training capacity down at Seymour Johnson.
``F-15 program flying training requirements will jump by
greater than 50 percent in Fiscal Year 2027 and 2028, and
currently, the Air Force has no training-coded aircraft
capacity to meet that requirement without reflow of combat-
coded F-15E. The Air Force is being forced to examine
drastically cutting the F-15 syllabus length to meet those
requirements. This creates risk on both quality and basic
course air crew graduates and on-combat air forces that will
receive aircrew with potentially subpar combat airmanship
skills.''
Just to be clear, that statement was given by the Air Force
in February, and that's before Selfridge basing decision was
made. So, if confirmed, what will you do to ensure that the 4th
Fighter Wing at Seymour Johnson Base has what they need to make
ends meet with this additional training requirement?
Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, I'm really glad you brought all of
this up. You have my attention. I understood everything you've
said. It's of great interest. I'll say that I'm very familiar
with the missions being flown out of Seymour Johnson. In fact,
I'll just say publicly, it matters a great deal to the Air
Force and the American people that we had over 80 drones shot
down in the Middle East this past year, over a 6-month period,
by a unit out of Seymour Johnson, and we have dozens----
Senator Budd. They just arrived at that very moment.
Mr. Lohmeier. They performed potentially mass casualty
events and dozens of these men and women suit up every day out
of Seymour Johnson doing an absolutely critical mission in
defense of the homeland.
So, you have my commitment that, if confirmed, I'll look
forward to working with Dr. Meink, if he's confirmed, to
looking at these things in a nonpartisan way, these basing
decisions, and the proper force structure, and bed down of
forces. But I'm interested in learning more from you about
Seymour Johnson, in particular.
Senator Budd. Thank you for that answer.
Just to be clear, if confirmed, you'll be responsible for
assisting the Secretary in organizing training and equipping
the Air Force. Correct?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes. Thank you, and, in fact, as we've
mentioned, that's exactly what the role of the Under Secretary
of the Air Force is, that's our chief prerogative is
organizing, training, and equipping Air and Space Forces to
provide to our combatant commanders.
Senator Budd. Thank you for that.
So, if confirmed, I look forward to hearing the plan soon
on how the Air Force is going to solve this issue, and at
Seymour Johnson Air Force Base. Thank you-all, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Wicker. Thank you, Senator Budd. Senator
Duckworth.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Lohmeier, you know as well as I do from your military
service that upholding good order and discipline is a
foundation for our professional fighting force. Lethality
relies on a honed practice of servicemembers following lawful
orders. I, myself, even though as a progressive serving in the
military, did not agree with President Bush's decision to look
for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq when we should have
been destroying the Taliban in Afghanistan. Still volunteered
to go and proud of my service to this day.
Sometimes, servicemembers have to serve against their own
personal opinions. Circumventing commanders on the battlefield
in real time could lead to life-or-death mistakes. As former
Secretary of Defense matters wrote, officers must carry out a
policy to the best of their ability, even when they might
disagree with that policy. To that end, I have questions about
your commitment to this core principle and the troubling
signals that your confirmation would send to those in uniform.
You claim to have only written your book and gone public
after the Inspector General concluded that your complaint had
no merit. But we all know that there are other channels
available to servicemembers concerned about commander decisions
or policy choices beyond the IG. Before you chose to write your
book or speak out in the media about policies that concerned
you, did you consider being a whistleblower to your Senators or
Representatives, which would've been protected under title 10,
section 1034, yes or no? Did you consider?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, Senator.
Senator Duckworth. You did consider it? That is news to us.
I ask that you present this Committee any correspondence that
you may have had with Members of Congress.
Mr. Lohmeier. Copy. I'll do that, Senator.
[The information referred to follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Duckworth. Thank you.
Did you file an article 138 complaint, which under the
Uniform Code of Military Justice, allows servicemembers to seek
redress for a wrong conducted by a commander?
Mr. Lohmeier. I did not, Senator.
Senator Duckworth. Okay. So, why did you not?
Mr. Lohmeier. There are many months in question, the
timeframe that we're talking about here, but at the time that
we separated after I had been relieved of my command, and there
was a command directed investigation about me as well as the
general officer that had relieved me of my command, it was a
traumatic period, a hard period of hardship for my family and
my children.
Senator Duckworth. No, I'm not talking about that. I'm
talking about when you were writing the book and you were still
in uniform. You chose to write--you made the decision to write
the book because you said there was no other way for you to
address your concerns. You said that you did reach out to
Members of Congress, which is news to me, but you did not file
an Article 138 complaint prior to writing your book and
speaking in public.
Mr. Lohmeier. I understand. I misunderstood your question,
Senator. My answer to your previous question, you asked if I
had considered reaching out to Members of Congress, and the
answer to that question was yes.
Senator Duckworth. Did you do it?
Mr. Lohmeier. I had communication with Members of Congress,
and I'd be happy to provide that to you. I exhausted all of the
means that I understood available to me. I'd been counseling
with the Base IG, Space Force IG, Base legal, Pentagon Public
Affairs, and the entire chain of command to include members of
the Joint Chiefs before I published the book.
Senator Duckworth. So, nobody talked to you about Article
138 complaint, which is a recourse that you could have taken?
Mr. Lohmeier. If that was discussed specifically Article
138, I don't recall the circumstances as to why I chose what I
did at that time regarding Article 138, specifically,
Senator Duckworth. I'm concerned that you didn't follow
through on all of the recourses that were available to you. You
are allowed to have your personal views, but there are rules
governing how public servicemembers can be in opposition to
lawful orders with your actions, you signal to those under your
command that it is okay to be insubordinate. As Peter Feaver, a
scholar who served in George W. Bush's National Security
Council has written, and I quote, ``Military officers who
believe that the policymaking process is heading in a bad
direction have ample recourse to advise within the chain of
command if their advice is not heeded. The country would not be
better served by senior officers provoking a civil military
crisis to advertise their policy differences with civilian
leaders.''
You were relieved of command, not for your beliefs, but for
how you chose to express them on Active Duty while holding a
position of authority over others. That is not persecution,
that is accountability, and if as a former commander you cannot
recount the basic recourses available to servicemembers, how
can we expect you to lead airmen and guardians? You were
relieved of command, not for your beliefs, but for how you
chose to express them on Active Duty while holding a position
of authority over others.
So, if it's true that you followed these steps, you still
decided to circumvent the chain of command while still on
Active Duty to speak up publicly without informing your
leadership. You could have resigned and spoken out, or
continued serving and kept your mouth shut, but instead, you
decided to continue serving and violate your professional
ethics. You are allowed to have those personal views. But there
are rules governing how servicemembers can be in opposition to
lawful orders.
So, I sort of feel like you broke the rules. There are ways
to do this, and you chose to instead circumvent those rules
that sets the standards for the people that you are about to
take charge of to continue to circumvent the rules, and that is
not conducive to good order and discipline within the military.
Do you understand that? That is my concern.
Mr. Lohmeier. If Chairman Wicker's okay with me responding,
I'd be happy to.
Chairman Wicker. Sure. I think the question is; do you
understand that that's her point of view?
Mr. Lohmeier. I understand your view, Senator. I think in
value or in principle, you and I agree on many things that
you've said. I will reject the idea that I did anything
unlawful, unethical, or publicly contrary to--I never publicly
criticized my chain of command. I never publicly was
politically partisan while acting in an official capacity. Both
of those allegations were the reasons I was relieved of my
command that I wasn't found guilty of either of those things.
Chairman Wicker. Thank you, and thank you, Senator
Duckworth. I think the distinguished ranking member has a
followup question.
Senator Reed. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Lohmeier, earlier this year, it came to my attention
that current serving military personnel have been receiving
emails, threatening them with being fired for supporting the
current DOD policies. One email that was sent to a military
officer with the subject line, ``Clean House,'' states, ``With
the incoming Administration looking to remove disloyal,
corrupt, traitorous liberal officers, such as yourself, we will
certainly be putting your name onto the list of those personnel
to be removed. We know you support the woke, DEI policies and
will ensure you never again influence anyone in the future. You
and--'' the redacted spouse's name--``will be lucky if you are
able to correct your military retirement.''
Mr. Lohmeier, if you became aware of someone sending
threatening emails to currently serving officers, what would
you do in your capacity?
Mr. Lohmeier. Well, Senator, I think the way in which
leaders go about communicating with their troops matters a
great deal. Having been in command, there's no way to retain
the respect of your troops if you don't communicate
respectfully to men and women of every background.
I don't particularly appreciate the tone in which that
email was written. I don't know who wrote it. I'm not familiar
with the background of that email, but I will say once again
that I share this committee's commitment to an apolitical
military. I don't believe witch hunts are healthy in the
military. I think that unity is our strength. I believe that
when we start to go down the path of discussing partisan
politics and ideology, it divides men and women. That's why the
American people tend to be so divided. They have a full range
of expression of these ideas.
Our uniform wearers, to Senator Duckworth's point, ought to
be focused on their mission and not being caught up in this
kind of rhetoric. But if these kinds of things came to my
attention, then of course they deserve attention. Every man and
woman in uniform deserves to be treated with respect.
Senator Reed. Do you believe it would be disqualifying
firing for someone on Active service in the military as an
officer listed or civilian if they sent such an email?
Mr. Lohmeier. Notionally, I think the context always
matters, Senator, and I've expressed that I don't necessarily--
I wouldn't write an email with that tone, personally. I'll
speak for myself. What's qualifying and disqualifying at a very
high level is whether or not people are acting ethically and
legally, upholding the oath to defend and support the
Constitution and following the lawful orders of those that have
been appointed over them to lead them. That's what every
enlisted and officer, troupe across every branch of the
military is taught to believe in.
It's that, ``Hey, whatever baggage I bring to my service in
uniform, politically, ideologically, I leave that at the
doorstep. I get the same ugly haircut as those next to me. I
wear the same uniform, bleed the same color, focus on the same
mission, and we care about readiness and lethality.''
Senator Reed. Well, I too believe that context is
important. If you look at the context, particularly your
comments since you were left the service, they created an
impression of someone committed to, frankly, a reprisal,
revenge, weeding out from the service those people who did not
ascribe to your thoughts. You said it in your--in so many
words, in your X filings and in your book.
I find it very difficult that suddenly you will have this
transition, this enlightenment that will disabuse you of all
those notions and make you someone who you claim today is
apolitical, not concerned about the extracurricular activities
of people in terms of their political positions, et cetera.
That's totally inconsistent what you've done over the last 4
years. I think you've made that evident today.
Mr. Lohmeier. Senator, am I allowed to respond?
Senator Reed. Of course. That's the system here.
Mr. Lohmeier. I'll say briefly that I really do believe--
one, I believe that everyone who's been in this hearing
understands that I'm authentic, and try and be true in what I
say. Second, I believe that every man and woman that's ever
worked with me would be glad to welcome me back into public
service.
Senator Reed. Does that include the people that you've by
name threatened to----
Mr. Lohmeier. I've not by name threatened anybody, Senator.
Senator Reed. Well, you've certainly indicated your
displeasure with lots of people by name.
Mr. Lohmeier. Well, I'm displeased with the cowardly
behavior of many people, but I've never threatened anybody. I
think that we have many great men and women in uniform, high
and low, who all have the right to try their best to serve this
country faithfully. I don't necessarily agree with all the
decisions they make, but I'm not a vindictive person. I think
that men and women in uniform will be very grateful to see me
come back into service, if I'm confirmed.
Senator Reed. Well, thank you for your testimony,
gentlemen. I will have questions for Mr. Overbaugh and Mr.
Zimmerman. Thank you very much, sir.
Chairman Wicker. Thank you very much. This concludes
today's hearing. I'd like to thank our witnesses for their
testimony. For the information of members, questions for the
record will be due to the committee within two business days of
the conclusion of this hearing, which is right now we are
adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:41 a.m., the Committee adjourned.]
------
[Prepared questions submitted to Mr. Matthew L. Lohmeier by
Chairman Wicker prior to the hearing with answers supplied
follow:]
Questions and Responses
duties and responsibilities
Question. What is your understanding of the current duties and
functions of the Under Secretary of the Air Force?
Answer. According to Title 10, the Under Secretary shall perform
such duties and exercise such powers as the Secretary of the Air Force
may prescribe. To my understanding, the Under Secretary of the Air
Force is responsible for the day-to-day affairs of the Department of
the Air Force (DAF), including the organizing, training, and equipping
of the Department's approximately 700,000 Active Duty, Guard and
Reserve airmen and guardians as well as Department civilians. The Under
Secretary serves as the ``Chief Management Officer'', overseeing the
Department's budget and directing strategy and policy development, risk
management, acquisitions, investments and the management of human
resources across the enterprise.
Question. In particular, what management and leadership experience
do you possess that you would apply to your service as Under Secretary
of the Air Force, if confirmed?
Answer. I have served in both the United States Air Force and the
United States Space Force. In the former, I served as an F-15C pilot;
in the latter, I served as a squadron commander of a space-based
missile warning system, including a multi-billion-dollar satellite
architecture responsible for the security of the U.S. homeland. In both
of these roles, I have accumulated a deep background in strategy,
policy, operations, and issues relating to human resources of our
airmen and guardians. This includes the welfare of the servicemembers
and their families.
Question. If confirmed to be the Under Secretary of the Air Force,
what role would you establish for yourself in the overall supervision
of the Assistant Secretaries of the Air Force and the Air Force General
Counsel?
Answer. To my knowledge, the Assistant Secretaries of the Air Force
and the Air Force General Counsel report directly to the Secretary of
the Air Force. If confirmed, I would look forward to working closely
with them in realizing the vision of the Secretary and synchronizing
the Department's efforts across all of their respective portfolios. I
would represent their equities in senior Department of Defense
governance bodies focused on the budget, policy, strategy, personnel
and other matters.
Question. If confirmed, what innovative ideas would you consider
providing to the Secretary of the Air Force regarding the organization
and operations of the Department of the Air Force?
Answer. If confirmed, I would bring my extensive experience as a
leader in both the Air and Space Forces to realize the Secretary of
Defense's vision of reinvigorating the warrior ethos of the Department.
Furthermore, I would leverage the relationships with my Under Secretary
counterparts to ensure that all services are synchronized in realizing
the Secretary's vision.
conflicts of interest
Question. Federal ethics laws, like 18 U.S.C. Sec. 208, prohibit
government employees from participating in matters where they, or
certain family members or organizations with which they have certain
relationships, have a financial interest.
Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to disclose any
potential conflicts of interest, including investments, business ties,
family relationships, or other connections that could be perceived as
influencing your decisionmaking?
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, that
if a conflict of interest arises, you will recuse yourself from
participating in any decisions regarding that specific matter?
Answer. I will comply with all recusal requirements under 18 U.S.C.
Sec. 208.
Question. Do you commit, without qualification, if confirmed, to
decisionmaking on the merits and exclusively in the public interest,
without regard to private gain or personal benefit?
Answer. Yes.
major challenges and priorities
Question. What would you see as your highest priorities for the
near-term and long-term future of the Department of the Air Force?
Answer. To my knowledge, the Department of the Air Force faces
several modernization requirements that need to be addressed
simultaneously. This includes nuclear modernization, which I believe is
long overdue. The Air Force maintains two legs of the nuclear triad and
a substantial portion of its command and control. Ensuring our nuclear
deterrence is unquestioned is a top priority. Additionally, we must
ensure our conventional capabilities are modernized for the high-end
fight. This includes the Next-Gen Air Dominance (NGAD) program and a
resilient space architecture that denies any so-called ``first-mover
advantage.''
As the Department moves forward on these modernization efforts for
the long-term, I acknowledge that both the Air and Space Force must be
ready to ``fight tonight'' with what we already have in our arsenal.
This means that--in the near-term--I will prioritize the readiness of
our airmen and guardians and restore a warrior ethos throughout the
Department.
Question. What do you consider to be the most significant
challenges you would face if confirmed as Under Secretary of the Air
Force?
Answer. If confirmed, I suspect that the modernization of the
nuclear portfolio and ensuring the resilience of our space-based
architecture will be the most pressing challenges.
Question. What plans do you have for addressing each of these
challenges, if confirmed?
Answer. For nuclear modernization, I plan on executing the vision
of the Secretary of the Air Force. If confirmed in this role, I believe
that my greatest contribution will be on communicating that nuclear
modernization is not an option; it is the very foundation of our
national security strategy--and we must get it right. This will require
more than just an all-of DAF effort, or even an all-of-DoD effort; this
requires buy-in from Congress as well as the many communities across
the country that host these capabilities. I look forward to working
with this Committee and this Congress, as well as civil leaders across
the country, to prioritize this.
On resilient space architectures, I believe that we must continue
to build partnerships with the commercial sector, leveraging what is
available and only building what we absolutely must.
national defense strategy
Question. The 2022 NDS outlines that the United States faces a
rising China, an aggressive Russia, and the continued threat from rogue
regimes and global terrorism. The Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the NDS
Commission testified in July 2024 that China, Russia, Iran, and North
Korea have formed an ``axis of aggressors'', supporting each other's
military aggression and illegal wars.
What is your assessment of the military threat posed by the
People's Republic of China?
Answer. I strongly believe that China poses the greatest military
threat to our forces. While the United States was focused on countering
violent extremists in the Middle East, China took advantage of the last
two decades by modernizing its forces and learning from the successes
and failures of the U.S. military. Ensuring that our modernization
timelines are ahead of theirs is crucial. If confirmed, I commit to
assisting the Secretary and the Department on shortening those
timelines.
Question. What is your assessment of the military threat posed by
Russia?
Though I have not been fully briefed on the Russian military
threat, evidence in open-source reporting suggests that Russia
continues to be an acute threat to Europe and our many partners and
allies there. While the military threat is real, I am perhaps more
troubled by the pursuit of asymmetric advantages in space, cyber and
electromagnetic warfare.
Question. What is your assessment of the military threat posed by
collusion among Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea?
Answer. Based on what is publicly available, I have become
concerned with the growing cooperation among these actors. This has
been exhibited specifically in the conflict in Ukraine, to include
soldiers from North Korea and drones coming from Iran and China. If
faced alone, the U.S. maintains overmatch, but growing cooperation
allows this group to cover down on shortfalls in each country's
capabilities. If confirmed, I commit to assisting the Secretary in
organizing, training, and equipping our airmen and guardians to ensure
advantages based on this collusion are never realized.
Question. In 2024, the Air Force announced a refocus on ``Great
Power Competition,'' with a series of reorganizations intended to
modernize force structure and force design, to align to the 2022 NDS.
In your view, has the GPC initiative been successful?
Answer. To my understanding, the Secretary of Defense has directed
a pause in the implementation of the Department's initiatives to ``re-
optimize'' for Great Power Competition. I have not been fully briefed
on the progress made in those efforts to this point. If confirmed, I
look forward to reviewing the progress and making a threat-informed
analysis of any future efforts in this vein. I commit to sharing the
results of that assessment with this Committee and this Congress.
Question. What do you perceive to be the Air Force's role in
competing with and countering China?
Answer. In my opinion, the role of the Department is to achieve a
level of readiness, capability, and capacity that will deter China from
pursuing military aggression to achieve its national security
objectives. This requires an unquestionable nuclear deterrent and a
conventional force able to achieve effects for the joint force anytime,
anywhere. No joint military operation can be conducted without some
element of the Department of the Air Force--a claim no other department
can make.
Question. Is the Air Force adequately sized, structured, and
resourced to implement the current strategy and the associated
operational plans? Please explain your answer.
Answer. I have not been fully briefed on the size, structure, and
resourcing of the Department. However, based on what is publicly
available, I am concerned with the fact that our Air Force fleets are
smaller than they have ever been and that their average age, in most
cases, is older than desired. Lower mission capable rates are reported
frequently and the costs of maintaining aging fleets keeps resources
from our modernization efforts.
Question. What are your primary lessons learned from observing
operations in Ukraine and the Middle East that the Air Force must
consider in its modernization efforts?
Answer. There are three lessons I have taken away from what is
reported in the conflict in Ukraine that are of importance to the
Department. First, the increased proliferation and usage of unmanned
systems--and their successes--mean we must analyze what the proper mix
of our manned and unmanned Air Force fleet needs to be. Second, the
resilience of our space-based architecture needs to be a focus area, as
actors are becoming more adept at jamming position, navigation and
timing services, like those provided by our GPS constellations. Third,
the contests in the electromagnetic spectrum mean the Department will
need to re-evaluate our investments there.
Question. Does the Air Force have the requisite analytic
capabilities and tools to support you, if confirmed, in evaluating the
Air Force's force structure and sizing strategies to ensure that it can
and will generate forces that are manned, trained, and equipped to
execute current plans and strategies? Please explain your answer.
Answer. I do not have enough information to make a judgment on the
soundness of our analytic capabilities and tools. However, if
confirmed, I commit to reviewing those within the Department,
conducting my own assessment, and will commit to sharing the results of
that assessment with this Committee.
Question. If confirmed, how will you address any gaps or shortfalls
in the Air Force's ability to meet the demands placed on it by the
operational plans that implement the current strategy?
Answer. I have not received briefings regarding operational plans
or the Air Force's ability to meet the demands therein. However, as a
private observer, the small fleet sizes, the ages of those fleets, and
the mission capable rates of those fleets are concerning. If confirmed,
I commit to assisting the Secretary in addressing those issues and will
be a vocal champion for the resources needed to solve them.
Question. If confirmed, what changes or adjustments would you make
in the Air Force's implementation of the current strategy?
Answer. While I applaud the Department's efforts to focus their two
Services and the Secretariat on high-end conflict and competition, I
have not been fully briefed on the implementation. I understand there
has been a pause directed by the Secretary of Defense on some of these
efforts. If confirmed, I plan on working with the Secretary to evaluate
the efficacy of current efforts, analyzing any proposed efforts that
are currently on pause, and sharing the results of my assessment with
this Committee.
Question. How would you characterize your familiarity with the
civilian leaders of the militaries of other nations and multi-national
and international air power-focused consultative forums? If confirmed,
on which leaders and forums would you focus your engagement with a view
to advancing the interests of the Air Force?
Answer. While my familiarity with civilian leaders of the
militaries of other nations is not substantial--given my years of being
a private citizen since leaving the U.S. Space Force--I recognize the
importance of leveraging these relationships to ensure shared security
objectives are met throughout the world. The acute threat posed by
Russia demands that we maintain a very tight military relationship with
our NATO allies and other partners who face unchecked aggression.
Additionally, Chinese rhetoric and actions require that we bolster the
relationships with our treaty allies in the Indo-Pacific as well as
other friends and partners who are observing malign behavior in that
region. In light of this, I would prioritize forums like the Munich
Security Conference, the Quad, and ASEAN, and I would ensure the many
joint and combined exercises we conduct with these partners are not
only maintained, but strengthened.
air force readiness
Question. How would you assess the current readiness of the Air
Force--across the domains of materiel and equipment, personnel, and
training--to execute its required missions?
Answer. To my knowledge, the Department of the Air Force is ready
to deter, defend, and fight today. However, our advantage is shrinking,
and overmatch is a concern of mine. If confirmed, I see my role as
assisting the Secretary in enhancing that overmatch for our Air and
Space Forces.
Question. In your view, what are the priority missions for which
current and future Air Force forces should be trained and ready in the
context of day-to-day activities, as well as for contingencies?
Answer. The Secretary of Defense has been very clear in focusing on
re-establishing deterrence, a warrior ethos, and rebuilding our
military. Due to this, Air and Space Force should be trained and ready
to execute five core missions: air & space superiority, global
precision attack, rapid global mobility, global intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR), and command and control.
Together, these functions provide a range of pre-emptive and reactive
options to the National Command Authority and allow the Department to
integrate with the joint force in peacetime, crisis, strategic
deterrence, and project power for high-end conflict. As we maintain
readiness, individual units may not train to all five core functions,
but as a department we stand ready to provide Air Superiority, Global
Precision Attack, Rapid Global Mobility, Global ISR, and Command and
Control, homeland, anywhere in the world, in support of U.S. national
interests.
Question. Does the Air Force have the requisite analytic
capabilities and tools to support you, if confirmed as the Under
Secretary of the Air Force, in measuring its readiness to execute the
broad range of potential Air Force missions envisioned by 2022 NDS and
associated operational plans--from low-intensity, gray-zone conflicts
to protracted high intensity fights? Please explain your answer.
Answer. The Air Force analytic and wargaming tools are essential to
understanding our readiness and modernization portfolios and to make
the right decisions that save taxpayers money and ensure the U.S.
unparalleled advantage. While good, additional capability and capacity
is required to modernize our wargaming, link models, and improve our
ability for rapid, timely analysis. We require sophisticated capability
tradeoff tools that enable a deep understanding of risk-to-mission,
risk-to-force, and the true costs associated with different force
structure choices at the speed a scale required to for thorough, data-
driven judgments that outpace our adversaries. To best support the
joint force, our Air Force requires advanced wargaming tools and
dedicated spaces, rapid modeling and simulation capabilities, improved
and cost-efficient data architecture, and interconnected tradeoff
tools.
Question. If confirmed, how would you prioritize maintaining
readiness in the near term, with modernizing the Air Force to ensure
future readiness?
Answer. In the near term, the Air Force must focus on developing
readiness for a peer threat while making smart risk decisions to
prevent overconsuming current force readiness. To ensure future
readiness, I believe the Air Force should focus efforts toward finding
balance between readiness and modernization. This is a tough challenge
because modernization cannot happen only in time of need and should not
be conducted across the force simultaneously. If confirmed, I will work
with Air Force leadership to phase in modernization that minimizes
impact upon total force readiness and take only calculated and
appropriate risk to either.
budget
Question. If confirmed, by what standards would you measure the
adequacy of funding for the Department of the Air Force?
Answer. If confirmed as Under Secretary, I will collaborate with
military leaders to ensure Air and Space Force budgets prioritize
homeland defense and deterring China and other adversaries. The DAF
must align with Defense strategy, maintain readiness, and modernize to
meet evolving threats. DAF must maintain air and space superiority to
project power and support the Joint Force. I look forward to ensuring
the resources given by Congress are used efficiently to maximize the
DAF's effectiveness.
acquisition
Question. Civilian oversight of the acquisition system has been a
cornerstone of the post-World War Two acquisition system.
What are your personal views on the principle of civilian control
of the defense acquisition system?
Answer. Delivering the capabilities our warfighters need on time
and within resources requires a collaborative effort between military,
civilian, and industry stakeholders. Strong and decisive civilian
leadership is necessary to ensure these efforts are executed with
discipline and rigor. If confirmed, I will work with the Department of
the Air Force's Senior Acquisition Executives to ensure cost, schedule,
and performance is maintained within our acquisition system.
Question. As Under Secretary of the Air Force, what would be your
role in the Air Force acquisition process--including in the processes
of defining requirements, acquisition, and budgeting?
Answer. If confirmed, I will fulfill my role in the acquisition
process as assigned to me by the Secretary of the Air Force and as
prescribed by 10 U.S.C. Sec. 9015. This will include executing all
aspects of acquisition and budgeting as requested by the Secretary and
in accordance with department policy. Additionally, I will work the
Secretary of the Air Force, the Service Chiefs for the Air Force and
the Space Force, and their staffs, to ensure requirements, acquisition,
and budgets align.
Question. If confirmed, what specific actions would you take to
improve each of the three aspects of the Air Force acquisition
process--requirements, acquisition, and budgeting?
Answer. If confirmed, I will team with the Assistant Secretaries
for Financial Management; Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics; and
Space Acquisition and Integration to review current processes and
identify where there is room for improvement. Next, I will work with
them to develop potential efforts for consideration by the Secretary
and support the decision throughout implementation. We must ensure we
maximize our budget resources to deliver effective programs that meet
requirements.
Question. What specific measures would you recommend to ensure
producibility and speed to field are considered for program
requirements in the Air Force acquisition system?
Answer. Efficient production is a key factor in delivering
warfighter capabilities in an affordable manner within a relevant
timeframe. If confirmed, I will work with the Secretary, Department of
the Air Force leaders, and industry to ensure requirements prioritize
producibility, agility, and speed in the Air Force acquisition system.
Question. What metrics are used to measure the success of rapid
acquisition projects? How is accountability ensured to maintain quality
and performance standards while accelerating the acquisition timeline?
Answer. Success in rapid acquisition projects hinges on balancing
speed with effectiveness. Several key metrics are used to measure this
success including cost, schedule, and performance. If confirmed, I will
work with the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition
and Sustainment as well as Service Acquisition Executives to ensure
rapid acquisition projects are executed with discipline and rigor.
Question. How will you seek to balance the need to rapidly acquire
and field innovative systems while ensuring acquisition programs stay
on budget and schedule?
Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to working with the Secretary,
Department of the Air Force Leaders, Congress, and other Department
stakeholders to streamline the requirements and acquisition process. I
will ensure our acquisition programs provide meaningful and effective
capabilities for the Joint force while leveraging all acquisition
authorities and flexibilities to deliver at speed and scale. If
confirmed, I will also ensure we have the necessary policies in place
to strengthen the health of the defense industrial base.
Question. What are your views on the appropriate roles of OSD
developmental and operational testing organizations with respect to
testing of Air Force systems?
Answer. Collaboration with our teammates in OSD development and
test organizations is crucial for ensuring effective use of defense
funding for next-generation warfighting capabilities. As the Air Force
prioritizes rapid capability development, OSD guidance may require
streamlining to expedite testing and evaluation without compromising
thorough oversight.
Question. What do you see as the role of the developmental and
operational test and evaluation communities with respect to rapid
acquisition, spiral acquisition, and other streamlined acquisition
processes?
Answer. I believe the developmental and operational test and
evaluation communities are critical stakeholders within acquisition
processes and play a key role in ensuring the timely deployment of
systems that deliver operational advantages to our warfighters while
meeting their requirements. For any program, regardless of its
structure, the sequencing and content of testing should be customized
to the specific program, considering factors such as technical and
operational risks, the urgency of operational needs, and the efficiency
of the testing process.
Question. In which areas, if any, do you feel the Air Force should
be developing new test and evaluation capabilities?
Answer. In my opinion, faster capability delivery requires
streamlined developmental and operational testing using real-time data
analytics and AI-driven assessments for rapid feedback and assured
mission effectiveness.
Question. To what extent should the Air Force exploit non-
developmental or commercial off-the-shelf solutions to meet Air Force
requirements? Would this put capabilities into the hands of airmen and
guardians more quickly, in your view?
Answer. I believe the Department of the Air Force should exploit
non-developmental items (NDI) and commercial off-the-shelf (COTS)
solutions where feasible, balancing the benefits of rapid acquisition
and cost savings against potential drawbacks. Prioritizing readily
available solutions can indeed put capabilities into the hands of
airmen and guardians more quickly.
Question. If confirmed, how would you accelerate the development of
these new capabilities?
Answer. If confirmed, I would advocate for simplifying and
accelerating the acquisition process for NDI/COTS solutions. This
includes reducing bureaucratic hurdles, streamlining documentation
requirements, and empowering program managers to make rapid decisions.
Exploring and expanding the use of Other Transaction Authorities (OTAs)
and similar flexible acquisition mechanisms would be a priority.
requirements
Question. The Fiscal Year 2024 National Defense Authorization Act
required the Joint Staff to take a clean-sheet approach to the
requirements process, and the Fiscal Year 2025 National Defense
Authorization Act required the Secretary of Defense to establish an
advisory panel on reforming the requirements process.
What recommendations would you make to the requirements process to
make it more adaptive to changes in threats and technologies?
Answer. In my opinion, top-level requirements could be written in
broad mission areas to allow the acquisition community to decompose
them in ways that allow for rapid technological insertion, increased
adaptation of commercial capabilities, and the flexibility to trade
performance for speed in certain circumstances. I believe a robust
discussion of the reforms proposed in the FoRGED Act and the report
directed under Section 811 of the National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2024 will allow the Military Services to work with
Congress on potential process reforms.
Question. What role do you see for the Joint Staff versus the
military services in the requirements process?
Answer. The Joint Staff (JS) acts as the integrator for service
needs, ensuring the services are working together to provide effective
mission solutions as a joint team. Furthermore, the JS must provide
oversight, ensuring the voice of the joint warfighter is front and
center in the requirements process. In addition, the JS ensures the
voices of all Services and Combatant Commands are taken into
consideration and manages the process of joint requirements
development. The Space Force has unique authorities in the requirements
process due to the designation of the Chief of Space Operations (CSO)
as Force Design Architect for the Armed Forces, and as the Joint Space
Integrator, which provide him broad latitude to capture and satisfy
joint warfighting gaps that can be filled with space capabilities along
with developing Service specific requirements.
audit
Question. If confirmed, what specific actions will you take or
direct to enable the Air Force to achieve a clean financial audit in
the most expedited fashion?
Answer. To my knowledge, the Air Force has made substantial audit
progress, with roughly 70 percent or so of its general fund balance
sheet audit-ready. If confirmed, I will prioritize completing an audit
quickly, leveraging industry tools and software to accelerate the
process.
Question. What are the benefits to Air Force missions and
effectiveness of achieving and maintaining a clean audit?
Answer. Annual audits drive positive change, bolstering mission
readiness while streamlining operations. Pursuing a clean audit opinion
enhances Air Force accountability for assets (aircraft, munitions,
satellites, engines, property), directly impacting mission
effectiveness.
Question. How will you hold Department of the Air Force leaders and
organizations responsible and accountable for making the necessary
investments and changes to correct findings and material weaknesses
identified in the audit process?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Secretary to establish
Air Force accountability through new governance, strict remediation
timelines for senior leaders, and targeted investments to achieve a
clean audit by the 2028 congressional mandate.
Question. Based on your experience, how do you see improved data
from Air Force financial management IT systems that support audit help
Air Force decisionmaking and readiness?
Answer. In my opinion, auditable financial IT systems improve
readiness reporting (asset status), budget accuracy (focusing on real
needs), and vendor negotiations (cost-effective mission support).
Question. As the Air Force continues down the path to a clean
audit, there are still lessons that can be gleaned beyond the end goal
of a clean audit opinion.
Based on your experience, how do you anticipate operationalizing
any intermediate lessons from audit into the Air Force' overall
management reform objectives?
Answer. My experience here is limited, but I believe a clean audit
opinion demonstrates a level of organizational competence and control
directly supporting readiness efforts through efficient business
operations. This approach enables the DAF to quickly adapt to change
while maintaining a consistent readiness posture.
air force programs
Question. What is your understanding and assessment of the
research, development, and acquisition programs supporting Air Force
modernization?
Answer. The Air Force needs a mission-driven research and
development (R&D) approach (science and technology, prototyping,
experimentation). If confirmed, I will collaborate with the Secretary
and Acquisition Executives on a risk/mission-balanced portfolio
addressing near/long-term needs aligned with interim National Defense
Strategy guidance.
Question. Where do you believe are the greatest gaps that remain
between required and current capability in both the Air and Space
Forces?
Answer. Any USSF capability gap would be concerning. We must
develop both offensive and defensive space control for any potential
conflict and for day-to-day operational freedom. Enhanced resilience,
via proliferated constellations, commercial capabilities, and
protection against kinetic and non-kinetic threats, is absolutely
crucial.
Question. The Air Force is on record as stating a need to purchase
a minimum of 72 fighter aircraft per year to maintain requisite force
structure.
In your opinion, what is the optimum mix of 4th and 5th generation
aircraft required to meet the threat outlined in the NDS?
Answer. In my opinion, the Air Force requires sufficient 4th and
5th generation aircraft located and operated in areas suited to their
capabilities. Fourth generation aircraft have many roles to play, and
where those roles exist, they should be performed by 4th generation--
not 5th generation--aircraft in order to preserve 5th generation
aircraft for missions only they can perform. From a capabilities
perspective, our 4th Generation aircraft still have an active role to
play in all but the densest and most advanced threat environments
around the world. Where the threat increases, specifically as we move
closer to Chinese mainland, the integration of 5th generation
capabilities becomes more important. But the question of fighter fleet
composition isn't just about capability, it's also about managing the
overall health of an aging aircraft fleet. We need to continually
replace 4th generation fighters with 5th generation fighters over time,
not just to address a growing, proliferating adversary threat, but also
to efficiently and effectively manage readiness and sustainment over
the coming decades.
Question. Given the importance of extending the range of U.S.
aircraft, what do you believe to be the overall tanker requirement for
the Air Force? At what rate and on what schedule must the Air Force
procure the new KC-46 to meet that requirement?
Answer. Global Air Force deployments rely on aerial refueling.
Tankers extend the reach of fighters, bombers, reconnaissance, and
cargo aircraft. A robust, adaptable tanker force is crucial for future
conflicts. Tankers must refuel receivers when and wherever they need
gas, ensuring Joint Force deterrence. Studies show benefits from
tankers with enhanced battlespace awareness, survivability systems. KC-
46A procurement, KC-135 modernization continue. Given tanker
criticality, the Air Force needs all current and modernized assets,
ensuring no capability gaps.
Question. Large-scale exercises such as Red Flag have illustrated
that 5th generation fighters such as the F-22 and F-35 need to fly
against multiple adversary aircraft to conduct much of their required
training. The Air Force has taken a number of steps to address
shortages in adversary air, including using contract air and requiring
units in training to supply their own adversary air.
What are your views as to the appropriate balance of contract and
organic adversary air capability?
Answer. The Air Force prioritizes adversary air for combat
training. Ideally, organic generation (unit sorties/aggressor force)
would suffice. From what I understand, aircraft availability and
instructor pilot manning necessitate contracted adversary air.
Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that the Air Force
properly addresses the challenges associated with the availability of
adversary air to ensure that its 5th generation fighters are properly
trained and ready for combat?
Answer. If confirmed, I would consider pursuing a professional 5th-
generation aggressor force while also funding contract adversary air to
support pilot production, absorption, and readiness, aligned with
budget priorities.
Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that the Air Force
properly addresses the challenges associated with the availability of
adversary air to ensure that its 5th generation fighters are properly
trained and ready for combat?
Answer. If confirmed, I would consider pursuing a professional 5th
generation aggressor force while funding contract adversary air to
support Air Force pilot production, absorption, and readiness
commensurate with budget priorities.
Question. What is your assessment of the readiness of the Air Force
heavy bomber fleet? As to each of the airframes listed below, what
improvements would you direct, if confirmed, to increase the mission
readiness of each airframe (B-1, B-2, B52)?
Answer. Currently, I am not aware of the challenges facing the
heavy bomber air frames and am unable to assess the appropriate
improvements that would enhance the readiness of the fleet. If
confirmed, I look forward to supporting the readiness of our bomber
fleet by working with the Secretary, Chief of Staff, and other the Air
Force leadership.
munitions
Question. Air Force munitions inventories--particularly for
precision guided munitions and air-to-air missiles--have declined
significantly due to high operational usage, insufficient procurement,
poor program execution, and a requirements system that does not
adequately account for the ongoing need to transfer munitions to our
allies. Due to draw down of certain weapons systems to support Ukraine,
the Department of Defense has begun to increase production and bolster
the industrial base.
If confirmed, what steps would you take to ensure the Air Force has
sufficient inventories of munitions to meet the needs of combatant
commanders?
Answer. If confirmed, I would review procurement plans, ensuring
maximum production of critical weapons and looking to expand capacity
as needed and where possible. I would also explore affordable mass
weapons and expanded munitions production overall.
Question. What changes in budgeting and acquisition processes would
you recommend to facilitate faster Air Force munitions replenishment
rates?
Answer. Long lead times hinder munitions replenishment. If
confirmed, I will explore solutions, including advance/multi-year
procurement and industrial base expansion.
Question. What is your view on the implications of DOD's self-
imposed restrictions on area attack and denial munitions, which are
intended to be consistent with the terms of the Ottawa Convention, to
which the United States is not a party?
Answer. To my knowledge, the US hasn't signed or ratified the
Ottawa Treaty. If confirmed, I will ensure Air Force compliance with
DOD directives, including munitions limitations.
Question. Based on your experience, how should the Air Force be
factoring in the needs of foreign partners and allies into overall
munitions forecasting in order to improve the long-term production
stability of the industrial base?
Answer. The Air Force will collaborate with Allies and partners to
project and formally submit long-term munitions needs. This demand
signal enables US industrial base expansion, engaging lower-tier
suppliers. Multi-year procurements provide industry stability for
infrastructure, workforce, and supply chain investments, supporting
defense industrial base revitalization.
Question. The Fiscal Year 2024 NDAA required the Department of
Defense to establish a pilot program to incorporate CL-20 into existing
munitions.
What is your understanding of the efforts by the Air Force to
execute any activities under this pilot in order to improve the
explosive yield or operational envelope of any of its munitions?
Answer. If confirmed, I will review Air Force efforts to understand
the utility of CL-20 to improve the performance of existing munitions
and for weapons currently in development.
Question. Regardless of whether the Air Force is doing anything
under this pilot program, how is the Air Force considering
incorporation of new energetic materials, like CL-20, or new
manufacturing processes for energetics, like biomanufacturing, into
existing munitions to increase explosive effects or operational
envelope of its weapons?
Answer. I am aware of research on improved warheads and propellants
for increased effectiveness and range solely based on publicly
available information. If confirmed, I will ensure Air Force
collaboration with industry to identify, develop, and implement these
advancements.
space
Question. The United States is increasingly dependent on space,
both economically and militarily--from the Global Positioning System on
which many industries and military capabilities rely, to the missile
warning systems that underpin U.S. nuclear deterrence. Our strategic
competitors--China and Russia--are engaged in a concerted effort to
leap ahead of U.S. technology and limit U.S. freedom of action in the
space warfighting domain.
In your view, does the 2022 NDS accurately assess the strategic
environment as it pertains to the domain of space?
Answer. The 2022 NDS recognized space as key to joint warfighting
and highlights growing Chinese space capabilities. Secretary Hegseth
emphasized space's importance, vowing investment in offensive and
defensive capabilities. If confirmed, I will provide inputs in support
of prioritizing a secure space environment for the US, our Allies, and
partners, reflecting its growing importance.
Question. In your view, what will ``great power competition'' look
like in space and to what extent do you view China's and Russia's
activities related to the space domain as a threat or challenge to U.S.
national security interests?
Answer. I believe China and Russia will continue to use coercion to
undermine US partnerships. This is particularly true in the space
domain, which is crucial to US security and prosperity. Achieving space
superiority is vital for the Air Force and the Joint Force overall. If
confirmed, I will work to ensure a robust US force structure with
offensive and defensive space capabilities to achieve national security
objectives.
Question. Are there other nation-states or other actors operating
in space that you perceive as a risk to the United States or as cause
for concern? If so, why?
Answer. Space is becoming more accessible for a greater number of
actors. North Korea and Iran, though not rivaling great powers, exploit
space and possess counterspace technology (e.g., jamming). Any actor
can leverage space tech (navigation, communications, imagery) via
smartphones, potentially challenging US interests. China's space
expansion, particularly in developing nations, threatens US space
influence, in my opinion.
Question. What specific actions would you take, if confirmed, to
enhance existing Air Force acquisition policies and process to move
space operations projects to orbit faster and cheaper?
Answer. The USSF must leverage private and commercial space
industry innovation and take advantage of agile acquisition approaches.
Driving speed into our acquisitions allows the Space Force to deliver
new capabilities faster to outpace U.S. adversaries and maintain the
technological advantage received from space. If confirmed, I will work
with the office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and
Sustainment, the other Departments, and with congressional stakeholders
to implement policy and statutory reforms and integrate commercial
space solutions needed to support moving space capabilities to orbit
faster and cheaper.
Question. The Space force is now acquiring space systems for
protect and defend missions no different than any other weapon system
of the Air Force.
Do you believe the Space Force is adequately structured and capable
to acquire, test and evaluate these weapons systems to deliver the
required effects to the combatant commands such as Space Command?
Answer. The Space Force is rapidly developing its acquisition
processes for space-based weapon systems, but the unique features of
the space domain require tailored testing and evaluation approaches.
Increased resources and infrastructure for space-specific testing,
including innovative methodologies and expanded capabilities, are
crucial for robust assessments. Continuous adaptation and refinement of
these processes will be essential for the Space Force to effectively
deliver capabilities to Combatant Commands. This iterative approach
will ensure the Space Force can meet the evolving demands of space-
based defense.
Question. What recommendations would you make to this acquisition
and testing process to improve its effectiveness in supporting the
combatant commands?
Answer. The rapid pace of emerging technologies from adversaries
requires an increasingly agile acquisition and testing process to
integrate and operate capabilities that support the requirements needed
by combatant commanders to meet warfighting timelines. If confirmed, I
would review the current processes for acquisition and test and
evaluation, work to reduce bureaucratic obstacles, and promote
collaboration and integration with commercial capabilities to improve
the Department's support to combatant commands and ensure they have the
capabilities needed in the Joint fight.
Question. What is your vision for the ideal relationship between
the Space Force and the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO)? How will
you minimize duplication of effort between the organizations?
Answer. If confirmed, my vision is to ensure the Space Force works
across the national security space community, including the NRO, to
efficiently acquire and deploy the capabilities the guardians need to
maintain the U.S.'s advantage in space. To minimize duplicative efforts
with the NRO, I would prioritize a comprehensive review of current
integration efforts to determine how the Department of the Air Force
could better collaborate with its mission partners to successfully
achieve this vision.
cyber and electronic warfare
Question. Section 1657 of the fiscal year 2020 NDAA directed the
appointment of an independent Principal Cyber Advisor (PCA) for each
Military Department, to act as the principal advisor to the Secretary
concerned on all cyber matters affecting that Department.
What do you see as the role of this position in the Air Force?
Answer. As mentioned, the role of the PCA is codified in law. If
confirmed, I will advocate for the PCA to continue providing trusted
advice on all cyber matters impacting the DAF.
Question. If confirmed, how would you plan to utilize the Air Force
PCA as part of your leadership structure?
Answer. If confirmed, I will recommend to the Secretary that we
maintain the PCA's role as an independent cyber advisor within the
DAF's leadership structure.
Question. What are Air Force's top three cyber challenges, and how
will you use the PCA to address them?
Answer. In the current resource constrained environment, the DAF
must field emerging technologies and novel solutions that enable
warfighting and the warfighter. There are numerous challenges resident
in the cyberspace domain, however top challenges include keeping pace
with malicious cyber actors to ensure warfighting systems have
integrity and are available to support warfighting requirements; the
ability of the AF and USSF to provide fully trained and equipped forces
for presentation to the Joint Force; and, the DAF's ability to address
the resources required to secure, protect and defend Air and Space
capabilities. The PCA's statutory role as an independent advisor is
crucial to providing unbiased advice and feedback on recommendations
from the Services on proposed solutions to the challenges across the
cyberspace domain.
Question. In September 2023, DOD released its 2023 Cyber Strategy.
The strategy charges DOD to persistently engage malicious cyber actors
and other malign threats to U.S. interests in cyberspace.
In your view, how well postured is the Air Force to meet the goals
outlined in the 2023 Cyber Strategy? What actions would you take, if
confirmed, to mitigate any gap between Air Force capacity and
capability and Cyber Strategy goals?
Answer. The DAF is focused on implementing the current DOD Cyber
Strategy. If confirmed, I will advocate for continuous reassessment of
current and future investment strategies, resources, and policies
necessary to mitigate any gaps that exist in our capability and
capacity to maintain warfighting readiness and lethality across the
cyberspace domain.
Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to improve
military and civilian cybersecurity career paths?
Answer. Protecting Americans requires prioritizing cybersecurity.
Our military and civilian workforce is key. If confirmed, I will
champion cyber workforce modernization: streamlining careers, deepening
expertise (via industry/academia collaboration), aligning roles with
classifications, improving talent management, enabling outside
transitions to public service, and securing competitive incentives and
development programs to attract and retain top talent.
Question. If confirmed, what would you do to enhance Air Force
information dominance capabilities?
Answer. Air and Space Force missions require information dominance.
JADC2 and GIISR development must consider system interconnectedness and
actionable information for timely decisions. Future operations need
near real-time, accurate tactical information globally, without
disruptive classification or sharing barriers. If confirmed, I will
leverage partnerships to field information systems optimizing air and
space power, enabling joint and combined forces to achieve national
security objectives.
Question. If confirmed, specifically what measures would you take
or direct to improve the cybersecurity culture across the Air Force
workforce--military, civilian, and contractor? How would you empower
and hold key leaders accountable for improvements in DOD cybersecurity?
Answer. Cybersecurity is everyone's responsibility. If confirmed, I
will empower the workforce to identify and mitigate risks, fostering
shared responsibility for system and information security. We will
embed cybersecurity in acquisitions, prioritize critical vulnerability
investments, and enforce accountability for negligence. I will champion
cybersecurity in exercises and inspections, informing investments. This
fosters cybersecurity ownership, keeping the Air Force ahead of
threats.
Question. What is your vision for the future of Air Force
electronic warfare (EW) capabilities?
Answer. To my knowledge, the Department's new EMS superiority
policy addresses contested spectrum, restructuring/modernizing EW, and
promoting EMS/EW awareness (training/doctrine). This aligns with the
interim National Defense Strategy guidance. EW is crucial; Air and
Space Force investment in it is essential. Joint and combined
operations require EMS-focused, software-defined, rapidly updatable
capabilities. If confirmed, I will prioritize EW, supporting innovation
and new doctrine in this area.
Question. What is your assessment of the adequacy and efficacy of
the EW training that Air Force personnel received in an Air Force
environment in specific airframes? In a joint environment with other
Military Services?
Answer. Enhanced Electromagnetic Spectrum Operations (EMSO)
training (operational/tactical/personnel) is likely needed. A finite
spectrum and increasing demand (military/civilian/commercial) creates
congestion. Training is constrained by physics, technology, and
domestic/international law/policy. Collaboration with stakeholders is
needed to find realistic joint training solutions minimizing impact on
other spectrum users.
Question. The Air Force is now re-invigorating the role of EW in
the combat arms. It has stood up the 350th electronic warfare wing to
ensure EW and Spectrum operations can perform their mission against a
near peer adversary at speed and relevance. It has begun to acquire the
EA-37B electronic warfare platform, which has the capability to perform
EW and spectrum operations across multiple domains. Lacking however is
the development of a dedicated career field devoted to EW and spectrum
operations.
If confirmed, will you commit to review and report back to this
committee on the role of EW and spectrum operations in the Air Force to
ensure it is holistically integrated across multiple domains, whether
the 350th EW wing can adequately support the EW platforms that the Air
Force maintains and whether there should be a dedicated career field to
this mission set?
Answer. If confirmed, I will review the Department's electronic
warfare/spectrum operations posture, focusing on cross-domain
integration, the 350th Spectrum Warfare Wing's support capacity, and
the feasibility and benefits of a dedicated career field.
unmanned systems
Question. What is your opinion on the manned and unmanned teaming
envisioned by the Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA) program?
Answer. In my opinion, to dominate in contested and highly
contested environments, the Air Force must innovate with regard to
risk-tolerant and runway-flexible capabilities that strengthen combat
power generation, credible mass, and forward posture. Collaborative
Combat Aircraft, teaming with crewed platforms like the F-22, F-35, and
F-47, represent an innovative capability that can be purchased at lower
costs than a comparable crewed platform, will help reduce our
dependence on traditional Main Operating Bases, and will increase the
lethality and survivability of our more exquisite, crewed platforms
during conflict.
Question. Do you see utility in encouraging the Military Services
to conduct more joint development in the area of aircraft and unmanned
systems?
Answer. There is significant utility in ensuring compatibility and
adaptability of unmanned systems across the Joint Force. Similar
systems can be used for different service missions; and specific
service systems can be used to address gaps in Joint Concepts. Joint
development increases alignment, opens options for missions, and
targets and helps to give direction and vector to spur growth in the
industrial base. While there is benefit in compatibility and
adaptability, we must ensure joint development does not increase unit
cost or reduce capability.
air force military end strength
Question. In your view, is the Air Force's current end strength
sufficient to meet national defense objectives? If not, what end
strength do you believe is necessary to do so?
Answer. Combatant commanders are calling for more air and space
power, not less. Based on publicly available information, I am
concerned as to whether the Air Force's current end strength is
sufficient to meet national defense objectives, especially when
contemplating the prospect of waging conflict in multiple theaters or
regions simultaneously. However, I do not, at present, know what that
proper end strength is. If confirmed, I will make it a priority to
investigate this matter and communicate my findings and recommendations
with this committee.
Question. How will the continued stand up of the Space Force, and
the related transfer of Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard
personnel, impact Air Force and Space Force end strength requirements
over the next 5 years, in your view?
Answer. The capabilities of Air Force Reserve and Air National
Guard personnel performing space missions is essential. I will ensure
DAF submits end strength and resource requests to Congress commensurate
with the transfer of space missions and personnel to the Space Force,
including end strength adjustments required by Section 514 of the
Fiscal Year 2025 NDAA as covered space functions transfer from the Air
National Guard to the Space Force.
Question. What additional force shaping authorities and tools does
the Air Force need, in your view? Is the Air Force's current end
strength sufficient to meet national defense objectives? If not, what
end strength do you believe is necessary?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Chief of Staff of the
Air Force, the Chief of Space Operations, the Director, Air National
Guard, and the Chief of Air Force Reserve to review Air Force and Space
Force end strength requirements to ensure an adequate balance between
current operational requirements and any future force requirements. I
will commit to ensuring the right end strength is achieved to properly
sustain a force structure that meets all mission demands and continuing
to work on modernizing our capabilities and our force.
Question. What additional force shaping authorities and tools does
the Air Force need, in your view?
Answer. I am not aware of any additional authorities needed at this
time. If confirmed, I will review force shaping tools, ensuring proper
DAF force strength management. I will work with Congress to maintain
DAF agility regarding needed force size and skills.
air force recruiting and retention
Question. The 2024 National Defense Strategy Commission stated that
``The DOD workforce and the all-volunteer force provide an unmatched
advantage. However, recruiting failures have shrunk the force and raise
serious questions about the all-volunteer force in peacetime, let alone
in major combat.'' In addition, DOD studies indicate that only about 23
percent of today's youth population is eligible for military service,
and only a fraction of those who meet military accession standards are
interested in serving.
If confirmed, how would you ensure the Department of the Air Force
maintains sufficiently high recruitment and retention standards?
Answer. The Department constantly evaluates recruitment and
retention programs, optimizing for talent competition. Recruiting and
retention rates are high. If confirmed, I will review these, ensuring
we attract and retain high-quality talent needed for national defense.
Question. If required to choose between maintaining high
recruitment and retention standards and achieving authorized end
strength levels, which would be more important, in your view?
Answer. Maintaining readiness while building the future force is
crucial. Data-informed recruiting and retention is key. If confirmed, I
will assess standards and policies, ensuring they support readiness and
warfighting needs.
Question. What impact do current medical and other qualifications
for enlistment in the Air Force have on the number of individuals
eligible for military service? If confirmed, what changes to such
qualifications, if any, would you recommend to increase the number of
individuals eligible for service without degrading the quality of
recruits?
Answer. I do not have access to information that would give me a
reason to doubt current standards. In my view, we must balance
standards with medical science/modernization and force readiness. If
confirmed, I will review qualifications and will prioritize this
balance, working with DOD to maximize effectiveness and ensure
readiness.
Question. Rather than relying solely on ever-higher compensation
for a shrinking pool of volunteers, what creative steps would you take,
if confirmed, to expand the pool of eligible recruits and improve Air
Force recruiting?
Answer. To my knowledge, Air and Space Force recruiting is on track
for fiscal year 2025, with record highs. If confirmed, I will evaluate
recruiting personnel, marketing, policies, and programs to ensure we
attract the talent needed for warfighter readiness.
Question. What do you consider to be key to the Department of the
Air Force's future success in retaining the best qualified personnel
for continued service in positions of greater responsibility and
leadership in the Air Force and Space Force?
Answer. Developing and retaining personnel requires continuous
training, education, and experience, fostering DAF leadership. If
confirmed, I will collaborate with development and management experts
and career field managers to align officer/enlisted/civilian
development with Air and Space Force needs, ensuring robust quality of
life and quality of service programs supporting our airmen and
guardians and their families.
Question. What steps, if any, should be taken to ensure that
current operational requirements and tempo do not adversely impact the
overall recruiting, retention, readiness, and morale of airmen and
guardians?
Answer. If confirmed, I will evaluate operational requirements,
recruiting, retention, and readiness to prioritize strategic force
management, quality-of-life, quality-of-service, warrior ethos, and
technology/innovation. I will tirelessly advocate for our airmen and
guardians, ensuring they have the necessary resources, training, and
support.
Question. In your view, do current recruiting standards--
particularly DOD-wide criteria for tier-one recruits--accurately
predict recruit attrition and/or future success in the Air Force?
Answer. To my understanding, DOD's tier-one recruiting standards
(education/aptitude/fitness) are valuable. Robust standards aid initial
unit integration, but predicting attrition and success is difficult
given evolving warfare and diverse career paths. If confirmed, I will
ensure DAF prioritizes meritocracy and refines recruitment metrics.
Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure the Air Force and
Space Force can continue to bring in new talent, while managing high
retention?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with our services to continuously
evaluate our recruiting force, our marketing strategies, and our
recruiting policies and programs to recruit new talent. We will
continuously evaluate our training, education, and experiential
development to retain the right leaders, and continuously look at how
we are providing quality of life and quality of service to keep
retention high.
Question. How would an individual's job performance factor into
your decisions to grant enlistment extensions or officer continuation?
Answer. If confirmed, I would evaluate how job performance is
currently considered in Air Force and Space Force retention decisions,
recognizing that force structure requirements are also important
considerations in granting enlistment extensions and officer
continuation to ensure the services maintain necessary manning across
career fields.
Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that the Department of
the Air Force maintains sufficiently high recruitment and retention
standards?
Answer. I understand the Department continuously evaluates
recruitment and retention programs to optimize policies and processes
necessary to thrive in the fierce competition for talent. I understand
the Department is seeing historically high recruiting and retention
rates. If confirmed, I will review these standards to ensure we recruit
and retain quality, highly skilled talent needed to fight and defend
the Nation we serve.
Question. In your view, what impact do current medical and other
qualifications for enlistment in the Department of the Air Force have
on restricting the number of individuals eligible for military service?
Answer. I currently have no reason or data to doubt the current
standards and criteria. In my view, we must balance our standards to
keep pace with medical science and modernization while meeting the need
for a ready and capable force. To that end, if confirmed, I will keep
the balance of those standards in the forefront and work with DOD to
maximize our effectiveness and ensure force readiness.
Question. If confirmed, what changes to such qualifications, if
any, would you recommend to increase the number of individuals eligible
for service in the Air Force or Space Force without degrading the
quality of recruits?
Answer. Again, I currently have no reason or data to doubt the
current standards and criteria. In my opinion, we must balance our
standards to keep pace with medical science and modernization while
meeting the need for a ready and capable force. If confirmed, I will
keep the balance of those standards in the forefront and work with DOD
to maximize our effectiveness and ensure force readiness.
Question. What factors do you consider to be key to the Department
of the Air Force's future success in retaining the best qualified
personnel for continued service in positions of greater responsibility
and leadership?
Answer. Developing and retaining personnel requires continuous
training, education, and experience that fosters DAF leaders. If
confirmed, I will collaborate with development and career field
managers to align officer, enlisted, and civilian development with Air
and Space Force needs, ensuring robust quality of life and quality of
service programs.
pilot retention
Question. The Air Force has consistently reported a shortage of
thousands of pilots including a shortage of at least 950 fighter
pilots.
What are the Air Force's current efforts to address this critical
problem? How would you assess the effectiveness of these efforts to
date?
Answer. I believe airline hiring growth challenges Air Force pilot
retention. This represents a risk to critical experience in the force.
Congress enabled historically high pilot retention bonuses. If
confirmed, I will monitor bonus effectiveness and work with Air Force
leaders and Congress to improve pilot production and retention.
Question. What monetary and non-monetary incentives and initiatives
implemented by the Air Force have yielded the most positive impacts on
pilot retention?
Answer. The Department prioritizes pilot retention (compensation,
talent management, quality of life/service), using targeted bonuses,
assignment stability and transparency, and a holistic approach. If
confirmed, I will monitor these efforts, working with Air Force leaders
to ensure effectiveness.
Question. What additional authorities does the Air Force need from
Congress to address this shortfall definitively?
Answer. If confirmed, I will review whether and/or what additional
authorities are needed to address the pilot shortage.
Question. How has the Air Force increased pilot production capacity
commensurate with the demands of the NDS?
Answer. To my understanding, the Department recognizes the critical
importance of addressing the pilot shortage to meet the demands of the
Interim National Defense Strategic Guidance with a highly trained and
ready force. The Air Force has implemented numerous programs to
increase pilot production capacity through a multi-pronged approach
that encompasses recruitment, retention, modernization of training, and
monetary incentives.
Question. As the Air Force prepares for competition with a peer-
adversary, what steps is it taking to increase quality standards within
and screening rates for flight school, and the pipeline beyond?
Answer. The Air Force's mission requires addressing the pilot
shortage. If confirmed, I will consult experts within the Department
and externally to enhance pilot pipelines, optimize training, and
prioritize retention.
air force reserve components
Question. In your view, what is the appropriate relationship
between the Active Air Force and the Air Force Reserve and Air Force
National Guard?
Answer. Active/Guard/Reserve interoperability is crucial. Seamless
integration enhances Total Force capability and readiness. If
confirmed, I will evaluate component dynamics to leverage each
component's unique strengths.
Question. What is your vision for the roles and missions of the Air
Force Reserve Components? If confirmed, what new objectives would you
seek to achieve with respect to the Air Force Reserve Components'
organization, force structure, and end strength?
Answer. The Total Force, including the uniquely capable Air Reserve
Component, needs roles/missions aligned with interim National Defense
Strategic Guidance. The Guard/Reserve provide strategic depth/
operational capacity across all missions/domains. If confirmed, I will
ensure an integrated Total Force approach to organizing, training, and
equipping airmen.
Question. Are you concerned that continued reliance on Air Force
Reserve Components to execute operational missions--both at home and
around the globe--is adversely affecting the ability to meet their
recruiting and retention missions? Why or why not?
Answer. In my opinion, sustained operations tempo creates
challenges. If confirmed, I will consult Guard/Reserve leadership,
assessing impacts and identifying necessary support for long-term force
health.
nuclear enterprise
Question. The Air Force is responsible for maintaining and
operating two legs of the nuclear triad, including its nuclear weapons
and the majority of the 107 nuclear command, control and communications
systems that link the President to the nuclear forces. There have been
a number of troubling incidents since 2007, including the inadvertent
transportation of six nuclear armed AGM-86 cruise missiles without
authorization by a B-52 from Minot Air Force Base to Barksdale Air
Forces Base, and the shipment of ICBM fuses to Taiwan. There have also
been continued reports of low morale and incidents of cheating on exams
at ICBM bases. These actions resulted in a loss of confidence and
dismissal of the two senior leaders of the Air Force, both the
Secretary and the Chief of Staff. They also resulted in number of
reviews, including a DOD enterprise review in 2014 by Secretary Hagel.
The reviews resulted in such actions as creation of Air Force Global
Strike Command, and its elevation to a four-star command, and the
establishment of a Deputy Chief of Staff for Strategic Deterrence and
Nuclear Integration (A10).
What are your overall views on responsibility of the Under
Secretary of the Air Force as regards the nuclear enterprise?
Answer. The Secretary (through the Under Secretary and Chief of
Staff) ensures nuclear deterrence mission safety, security,
reliability, effectiveness and credibility. If confirmed, this will be
a top priority.
Question. If confirmed, what actions will you take to oversee the
continued implementation of these reforms of the nuclear-focused
organizational and personnel systems?
Answer. If confirmed, I would assess implementation and
effectiveness of these reforms to determine their positive impact and I
commit to sharing the results of that assessment with this Committee.
Question. If confirmed, what would be your approach to ensure these
nuclear-related systems are adequately resourced?
Answer. If confirmed, I will prioritize monitoring Air Force
nuclear enterprise resourcing to ensure sufficient support for mission
safety, security, reliability, effectiveness, and credibility.
Question. Will you commit that, if confirmed, you will personally
visit Air Force nuclear facilities and bases to gain an in-depth
understanding of both the infrastructure, hardware, and especially how
our airmen operate, maintain and secure them?
Answer. Yes. Strategic nuclear deterrence is a top DAF priority. If
confirmed, I will personally visit airmen executing this 24/7 mission,
ensuring they have the necessary resources and facilities.
Question. If confirmed, will you commit to preserving the unique
role of Air Force Global Strike Command within the Air Force nuclear
enterprise and ensuring its structure reflects the command's
responsibility for two legs of the Nation's strategic nuclear triad and
over 70 percent of the DOD's nuclear command, control, and
communications capabilities?
Answer. Consistent with the direction of the Secretary, the CSAF
and I, if confirmed, will ensure any restructuring of AFGSC will
improve the nuclear enterprise obligations to USSTRATCOM and not
adversely impact it.
Question. The 2022 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) reaffirmed long-
held American doctrine to maintain the Nation's nuclear triad of land-,
sea-, and air-based capabilities.
Do you agree that modernizing each leg of the nuclear triad and the
Department of Energy (DOE) nuclear weapons complex is a critical
national security priority?
Answer. Yes, modernizing the nuclear triad and the Department of
Energy's nuclear weapons complex is not just a priority, but a
necessity for maintaining America's defense superiority. A robust and
modern nuclear deterrent is the cornerstone of our national security,
and it is essential that we invest in its modernization to stay ahead
of emerging threats and maintain our strategic edge. If confirmed, I
will assess the status and provide the needed advocacy to continue to
have a capable, and ready nuclear deterrent.
Question. Do you believe the current program of record is
sufficient to support the full modernization of the nuclear triad,
including delivery systems, warheads, and infrastructure?
Answer. As I understand it, the current plan modernizes the triad
(delivery systems, warheads, infrastructure). If confirmed, I will
review existing nuclear systems and modernization initiatives to best
maintain a safe, secure, effective deterrent.
Question. The Minuteman III ICBM is decades beyond its planned
lifecycle and must be replaced by the Sentinel ICBM if the U.S. is to
retain a triad of strategic nuclear delivery systems. However, the
Sentinel program has encountered significant issues over the past year,
culminating with a Nunn-McCurdy breach.
Do you support the current program of record for the Sentinel ICBM,
and if confirmed, will you advocate for fully funding the program?
Answer. Sentinel, certified as essential, underwent restructuring.
If confirmed, I will follow Nunn-McCurdy recommendations. ICBM
modernization is absolutely foundational to deterrence. I will continue
to seek schedule and cost improvements for the program. Success
requires coordinated government, industry and community effort for this
massive, once-in-a-generation modernization.
Question. Do you support the current program of record for the
Long-Range Stand Off weapon and if confirmed, will you advocate for
fully funding the program?
Answer. If confirmed, I will review the status of the Long-Range
Stand-Off (LRSO) program, ensuring on-time delivery of this critical
deterrence capability and adequate resourcing.
Question. What are your views on expanding production of the B-21
bomber?
Answer. If confirmed, I will review the B-21 program and work with
Air Force leaders and the Commander of USSTRATCOM to assess the total
number required for the Joint Force.
Question. What are your views on reconverting the full B-52 fleet
back to be nuclear-capable once the New START Treaty expires?
Answer. To my knowledge, the Air Force has assessed what it would
take to achieve full B-52 nuclear reconversion. If confirmed, I will
review this assessment and ensure the Air Force is postured and
responsive to Presidential direction.
Question. The Air Force owns and operates the majority of the 107
nuclear command, control and communications systems. Major reforms have
been put in place at U.S. Strategic Command to set future requirements,
while the Undersecretary for Acquisition and Sustainment oversees the
acquisition of new capabilities to replace existing systems.
What are your views on the adequacy of the current Air Force
nuclear, command, control and communications systems?
Answer. Maintaining safe, secure, reliable, effective, and credible
nuclear deterrence, including NC3, aligns with the Secretary of
Defense's priorities for the Department. If confirmed, I will assess
DAF NC3 systems, evaluating their contribution to this deterrence.
Question. Do you support the current organizational approach to the
acquisition and management oversight of the modernization of nuclear
command, control and communications?
Answer. I have not yet been fully briefed on this approach. If
confirmed, I will review Air Force NC3 modernization programs and their
management structures.
Question. The E-4B National Airborne Operations Center utilizes an
aging 747-200 platform that must be replaced in the 2030's to ensure
the capability and continuity of a number of essential missions
including nuclear, command, control and communications.
What are your views on the Survivable Airborne Operations Center
program to replace this platform?
Answer. If confirmed, I will review the SAOC program, ensuring it
delivers the critical capability of a highly survivable command,
control, and communications center.
Question. Patrols in the missile fields are accomplished using
Humvees which are ill-equipped for the long duration patrols, extreme
cold and road conditions resulting in accidents and tragic fatalities
of missile field Security Forces. The use of Joint Light Tactical
Vehicles as a replacement are also ill-suited to this mission, except
in certain convoy operations.
Do you support efforts to replace this capability currently
underway by the Air Force Global Strike Command with a more commercial
solution?
Answer. Yes, I support the efforts of Air Force Global Strike
Command to review commercial replacement options. I support continued
efforts to determine a suitable commercial replacement for daily site
security in missile field operations.
Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that the Air Force
continues its efforts to improve the training, readiness, morale,
welfare, and quality of life of the airmen charged to execute and
support the Air Force's nuclear mission?
Answer. If confirmed, my top priorities will be strengthening both
mission readiness and family support. To enhance our mission
effectiveness, I will focus on fostering a warrior ethos and
modernizing training through the integration of cutting-edge
technologies. Simultaneously, I am committed to rebuilding vital
support systems for military families. This includes expanding access
to quality childcare, enhancing spouse employment assistance programs,
and streamlining relocation support.
cruise missile defense of the homeland
Question. Former Deputy Secretary of Defense Hicks designated Air
Force as the DOD lead for developing a cruise missile defense
architecture for the homeland in July 2022.
Where is Air Force on finalizing an architecture?
Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to implementing President
Trump's Iron Dome for America Executive Order, also known as the Golden
Dome. The comprehensive Golden Dome architecture will include
contributions from multiple Services and Agencies, to include the Air
and Space Force. The Air Force and Space Force will also contribute to
the Golden Dome with sensing, command and control, and interceptor
systems to defend the homeland.
Question. Has the Unified Command Plan realignment of Space Command
as the global integrator for missile defense caused a course correction
in this process?
Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to implementing President
Trump's Iron Dome for America Executive Order, also known as the Golden
Dome. The comprehensive Golden Dome architecture will include
contributions from multiple Services and Agencies, to include the Air
and Space Force. The Air Force and Space Force will also contribute to
the Golden Dome with sensing, command and control, and interceptor
systems to defend the Homeland.
Question. If confirmed, what steps will you take to expedite the
completion of a final architecture and develop an acquisition and
fielding strategy for the defense system, as well as for the associated
domain awareness and missile warning and tracking modernization
capabilities?
Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to implementing President
Trump's Iron Dome for America Executive Order, also known as the Golden
Dome. The comprehensive Golden Dome architecture will include
contributions from multiple Services and Agencies, to include the Air
and Space Force. The Air Force and Space Force will also contribute to
the Golden Dome with sensing, command and control, and interceptor
systems to defend the Homeland.
Question. In your view, how does this effort align with the
President's recent ``Iron Dome for America'' executive order to develop
a national integrated air and missile defense architecture?
Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to implementing President
Trump's Iron Dome for America Executive Order, also known as the Golden
Dome. The comprehensive Golden Dome architecture will include
contributions from multiple Services and Agencies, to include the Air
and Space Force. The Air Force and Space Force will also contribute to
the Golden Dome with sensing, command and control, and interceptor
systems to defend the Homeland.
spectrum
Question. Electromagnetic spectrum plays a critical role in many
DOD missions.
In what ways do the Air Force and Space Force rely on spectrum to
support warfighter requirements? In your view, which warfighter
spectrum requirements will be essential to competing with Russia and
China on a future battlefield?
Answer. The Air and Space Forces rely heavily on the
electromagnetic spectrum for all warfighting functions, from
communication and navigation to intelligence gathering and weapons
systems. The ability to maintain assured access to and control of the
electromagnetic spectrum will be essential for competing with
sophisticated adversaries like Russia and China. To compete effectively
with these nations, future warfighters will require resilient
communication systems, effective air-and land-based radars, spectrum-
agile weapons systems, advanced electronic warfare capabilities, and
dynamic spectrum access tools for contested environments. Effective
coordination and collaboration across services and with international
allies will be vital for achieving spectrum dominance and maintaining a
competitive edge.
Question. In March 2023 testimony before the Senate Armed Services
Committee, former Secretary of Defense Austin stated that, with respect
to losing ``S-band'' spectrum, ``it [would] be devastating, . . . it
would take us somewhere north of 20 years to try to recover from--from
the loss of that--that spectrum. Parts of that spectrum are vital to
our national defense and the protection of the homeland. And--and, you
know, in order to describe exactly--well, you know what the--what the
specific platforms are, but we would have to go to a classified session
to speak in detail about this. But I would tell you that this is not
something you can fix overnight once you break it. It'll take 20 years
plus to recover from that.''
In addition, with respect to the Secretary's statement, General
Alvin stated when he was nominated to be Chief of Staff of the Air
Force, ``I agree with previous testimony that has been provided by
Secretary Austin that this would take decades.''
Do you agree with the former Secretary of Defense and the Chief of
Staff of the Air Force?
Answer. To my knowledge, the S-band contains spectrum that is
foundational to a wide range of critical Air and Space Force missions,
including missile warning, satellite control, air defense radar
operations, space tracking, counter-UAS, and testing against adversary
threats. My understanding is that losing access to this band would
severely degrade our ability to execute national security functions in
both peacetime and conflict.
It is also my understanding that recovery from such a loss would
not be quick or easy. The risks to mission assurance and national
defense in the interim would be profound.
If confirmed, I will prioritize efforts to preserve and modernize
the Department's access to the electromagnetic spectrum, especially in
bands like S-band that are essential to our strategic advantage. I will
also work to ensure the Department of the Air Force remains an active
partner in national spectrum policy discussions, balancing national
security requirements with broader spectrum demands.
Question. Were DOD required to ``vacate'' or leave the ``Mid-Band''
spectrum instead of sharing, what are the potential operational and
dollar costs to the Air Force and Space Force, in your view? How long
would a move to a different area of the spectrum take, in your view?
Answer. If the DOD were required to vacate the mid-band spectrum
instead of sharing it, estimating the potential operational and dollar
costs to the Air Force and Space Force is impossible without first
identifying available alternative spectrum and rigorously studying its
suitability through scientific processes. Given that the physics of the
mid-band cannot be replicated in other parts of the spectrum, finding a
suitable alternative presents a significant technical challenge, with
potentially significant implications for national security. This
analysis is crucial to ensure the desired operational effects are
maintained.
Similarly, the time required for a transition to a different
spectrum is dependent on the specific band chosen, industry's ability
to manufacture components that operate in this range, and the
complexity of migrating existing systems, and therefore the cost cannot
be estimated until a suitable alternative frequency is identified and
studied.
Question. In your view, how would direction to DOD to vacate
additional portions of spectrum affect the implementation of the
President's ``Iron Dome for America'' executive order whose missile
defense radars operate primarily in the S-band?
Answer. Vacating any part of the S-band spectrum, especially
frequencies crucial for missile defense radars, could severely hamper
President Trump's ``Golden Dome for America'' initiative. Any decision
regarding S-band reallocation must carefully weigh the benefits against
the potential risks to missile defense capabilities. If confirmed, I
will review the latest analysis and work with DOD CIO, Combatant
Commanders, and the Congress to find the right balance to secure
America's vital national security interests.
science, technology, and innovation
Question. In your view, how have the Air Force and Space Force
prioritized limited research and development funding across its
technology focus areas? Specifically, where are the Air Force and Space
Force either increasing or decreasing focus and funding?
Answer. The Air Force and Space Force R&D communities have
incredible opportunities to provide both new technologies to improve
legacy platforms while providing leap-ahead capabilities in the near-
and mid-term. Today's investment in R&D will ultimately determine who
has the technological advantage in tomorrow's conflicts. If confirmed,
I look forward to gaining additional insight into the Department's R&D
portfolio to ensure investments in those areas are fully aligned with
delivering the most lethal and impactful capabilities to the warfighter
for both deterrence and armed conflict.
Question. If confirmed, how would you improve efforts the Air Force
and Space Force are making to identify new technologies developed
commercially by the private sector and apply them to military and
national security purposes?
Answer. It is critical that the Air Force leverage those
commercially developed technologies for military applications--where
possible and with the proper safeguards in place--and utilize USAF
investments for military unique technology development. There is
untapped expertise throughout the commercial market--in the traditional
Primes, the non-traditional companies, and the immense small business
community. In a resource-constrained environment, the Department of the
Air Force needs to pull every lever and turn every knob available to
tap into the multi-billion-dollar market out there that is eager to
contribute to protect America's equities and way of life. If confirmed,
I plan to prioritize this and ensure the Air Force is leveraging every
innovation possible.
Question. How would you work to increase investments in research
infrastructure through Air Force MILCON investments to match growing
investments in China in research infrastructure in domains such as
quantum science, hypersonics, and advanced materials?
Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure the authorities granted by
Congress under Title 10 will be utilized to their maximum extent, to
include innovative uses of minor MILCON authorities to combat the
rising costs of maintaining aging facilities and targeted modernization
projects while working to increase the prioritization of major
laboratory and test center facility requirements for MILCON funding for
strategic investments by the USAF.
Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that the limited Air
Force science and technology budget is used for genuine science and
technology technical challenges, and not to support more mature
prototyping and development activities more appropriately addressed
with other Air Force RDTE resources?
Answer. Science and Technology (S&T) investments are focused on
Basic Research, Applied Research, and Advanced Technology Development
areas that need to be informed by and aligned to operational
requirements and capability needs. If confirmed I look forward to
reviewing how the current Air Force structure supports S&T
prioritization and will work to ensure Air Force optimizes S&T
resourcing, infrastructure, and expertise.
Question. In your view, would the Air Force benefit from
authorities that enable it to make use of expert foreign national
talent in appropriate capacities and in appropriate settings to support
modernization priorities and better compete with peer adversaries?
Answer. I believe the Air Force, and indeed the broader national
security enterprise, would benefit from carefully managed authorities
that allow us to leverage the expertise of foreign nationals in
appropriate capacities and settings. This talent pool can offer unique
skills and perspectives crucial for advancing modernization priorities
and maintaining a competitive edge against peer adversaries,
particularly in critical technology areas. However, any such initiative
must prioritize robust security protocols and rigorous vetting
processes to safeguard sensitive information and protect national
security interests. A balanced approach that leverages talent while
mitigating risk is essential.
Question. What incentives should the Air Force provide to
universities and researchers to develop domestic technical talent and
counter opportunities for researchers in critical fields being offered
by peer adversaries, including China?
Answer. If confirmed, I will carefully consider the need for
incentives to encourage universities and researchers to develop
domestic technical talent, particularly in critical fields where
competition with peer adversaries is intense. This includes reviewing
existing programs and exploring potential new approaches to ensure we
can attract and retain the best and brightest minds to support the Air
Force's mission.
operational energy
Question. The Department defines operational energy as the energy
required for training, moving, and sustaining military forces and
weapons platforms for military operations, including the energy used by
tactical power systems, generators, and weapons platforms. Longer
operating distances, remote and austere geography, and anti-access/area
denial threats are challenging DOD's ability to assure the delivery of
fuel. As the ability to deliver energy is placed at risk, so too is the
Department's ability to deploy and sustain expeditionary Air Force
units around the globe.
What are your ideas for future capabilities that would enable an
expeditionary Air Force through the assured delivery of energy to the
warfighter?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the DAF to pursue
revolutionary future capabilities that deliver energy assurance and
maximize combat capability in contested domains. To my knowledge, the
DAF is using a public-private partnership to maximize return on
investment for a Blended Wing Body (BWB) aircraft that will increase
efficiency by 30 percent and offer solutions to multiple capability
needs. I will also explore potential hybrid-electric aircraft and space
solar power technologies that enable agile combat employment concepts
for expeditionary forces. I will strengthen the linkages between DAF
offices and industry to promote innovative future capabilities that
assure the delivery of energy to the warfighter.
Question. What are your ideas for reducing the risk associated with
the Air Force's dependence on vulnerable supply lines?
Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure appropriate emphasis is placed
upon energy supportability, specifically by ensuring holistic analysis
of campaign-level energy consumption and addressing expected supply
chain risks. I will optimize fuel use by exploring the viability of
alternative propulsion systems for legacy aircraft, increased
performance through better mission planning and execution software,
improved aerodynamics through drag reduction technologies, and engine
sustainment technologies that maximize lethality per gallon.
infrastructure challenges
Question. Non-DOD funding mechanisms such as energy savings
performance contracts, utility energy savings contracts, and power
purchase agreements are excellent means by which the Air Force can
improve infrastructure, increase resilience, reduced deferred
maintenance, implement alternative energy resources, save taxpayer
funds, and secure other benefits without upfront appropriated funds.
If confirmed, what steps would you take to streamline this process
and how long would it take you to resume entering into contracts of
this sort for the benefit of Air Force installations?
Answer. If confirmed as Under Secretary, I will leverage all
authorities, including third-party contracts, to bolster infrastructure
and energy security. I will collaborate with OSD and DOE to streamline
processes and expedite solutions.
air force-related defense industrial base
Question. What is your assessment of the systems and processes for
identifying, evaluating, and managing risk in the Air Force's organic
and commercial defense industrial base, including the munitions
industrial base?
Answer. A strong Air Force requires understanding and managing
defense industrial base risk. If confirmed, I will advance tools and
processes to proactively identify supply chain risks and capacity
bottlenecks, addressing them before crises arise.
Question. What do you see as the levers to motivate the defense
industrial base to make additional capital investment (for facilities
and tooling), as well as research and development investments to
increase the capacity of the defense industrial base?
Answer. Industry relies on clear and consistent demand signal to
determine where return on investment can be found. If confirmed, I will
work within the Air Force and with Congress to incentivize capital
investment in the industrial base.
Question. How should Air Force acquisition leaders consider impacts
on the industrial base when addressing requirements for
recapitalization or modernization of major defense weapons systems and
munitions?
Answer. If confirmed, I will collaborate with Service Acquisition
Executives to ensure acquisition strategies consider industrial base
impacts, promoting competition, lowering barriers to entry, and
incentivizing strategic investment and R&D.
Question. How would you seek to ensure the Air Force engages with
the broadest industrial base possible, including traditional
contractors, nontraditional contractors, and small businesses?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with Service Acquisition
Executives to connect the Air Force with all supply chain tiers,
including crucial small businesses. I will engage industry
associations, state/local governments, and trade organizations to
understand industrial base risks and constraints.
Question. If confirmed, what changes, if any, would you pursue in
systems and processes to ensure that risk in the Air Force-relevant
sectors of the defense industrial base is adequately managed to enable
the development, production, and sustainment of technically superior,
reliable, and affordable weapons systems and munitions?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with Service Acquisition
Executives to proactively identify and address industrial base risks
and bottlenecks. I will also ensure acquisition strategies promote
competition, leverage Modular Open Systems Architectures, and
prioritize producibility.
military health system (mhs) reform
Question. Do you support the implementation of the MHS reforms
mandated by the NDAAs for fiscal years 2017, 2019, and 2020?
Answer. If confirmed, I will support the DHA as directed by
Congress. The DAF remains a steadfast partner, providing leadership and
project management to transfer programs and resources lawfully. Despite
service-specific challenges, I will ensure DAF dedication to the
Defense Health Agency and Military Treatment Facilities supporting Air
Force and Space Force missions and community healthcare.
Question. Will you ensure that the Air Force continues to provide
the military medical personnel needed to provide care in military
treatment facilities?
Answer. I champion the MHS mission for a medically ready force and
ready medical force--anytime, anywhere. Our servicemembers and families
deserve the best care, and our medical personnel are key. If confirmed,
I will review personnel strategy to ensure we recruit, access, and
retain the right talent for this complex mission.
military compensation
Question. What is your assessment of the adequacy of military
compensation and benefits?
Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to a detailed review of
military compensation, including the junior enlisted pay increase
Congress enacted last year, to better understand which, if any, areas
may need revision to allow for a more targeted approach to the overall
compensation package.
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to control the
rising cost of military personnel?
Answer. If confirmed, I will review DAF personnel costs, drivers of
growth, and potential savings while maintaining our ability to attract
and retain talent.
non-deployable servicemembers
Question. Do you agree that airmen and guardians who are non-
deployable for more than 12 consecutive months should be subject either
to separation from the Army or referral into the Disability Evaluation
System?
Answer. Readiness is paramount. If confirmed, I will align non-
deployment policies with Air Force priorities, prioritizing readiness
and mission needs. Individual circumstances will be considered, but
operational strength and deployability are key. I will ensure our
forces remain ready.
Question. In your view, under what circumstances might the
retention of a servicemember who has been non-deployable for more than
12 months be in the best interest of the Department of the Air Force?
Answer. I lack sufficient information to speculate. If confirmed, I
will work with DAF leaders to understand the current approach and
consider Air Force mission and readiness requirements.
suicide prevention
Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take to prevent
suicides in the Active Air Force, the Air Force Reserve, and the Air
National Guard, and in the families of airmen across all components?
Answer. The Air Force must promote mental well-being, eliminate
barriers to care, and destigmatize seeking help. This enhances
lethality, readiness, and warrior ethos. If confirmed, I will support
the Brandon Act and evidence-based programs improving mental health
access.
sexual harassment and assault prevention and response programs
Question. Do you believe the policies, programs, resources, and
training that DOD and the Military Services have put in place to
prevent and respond to sexual assault, and to protect servicemembers
who report sexual assault from retaliation, are working? If not, what
else must be done?
Answer. As a private citizen who previously served in leadership
roles in the Air and Space Forces, I see significant emphasis on ending
sexual violence in our Services. Sexual assault harms our airmen and
guardians and has a direct impact on readiness, demanding our
attention. If confirmed, I will review related policies, programs,
resources, and training for effectiveness, including retaliation
protection for reporters.
Question. What is your view of the necessity of affording a victim
both restricted and unrestricted options to report sexual harassment?
Answer. Restricted and unrestricted reporting offer victims
confidential help or official reporting. These options allow the DAF to
tailor support to individual needs.
space force personnel management act
Question. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2024 authorized the Space Force to combine all Active and Reserve
component guardians into a single, full-time/part-time, component.
In your judgment, how will this novel military personnel
arrangement benefit the Space Force?
Answer. I have been informed that the Space Force Personnel
Management Act (PMA) directs the Space Force to design and implement an
alternative military personnel management system without components.
This unified service will offer guardians the ability to serve in both
full-time and part-time work roles and transition between them based on
individual preferences and the needs of the Space Force. This authority
benefits the Space Force by providing unique talent management
opportunities extending the continuum of service without service
interruption, attracting and retaining talent, and ultimately enhancing
military readiness and lethality.
Question. How will you ensure former members of the Air Force
Reserve and Air National Guard are not disadvantaged by joining the
Space Force under this new construct?
Answer. My understanding is that the Space Force is working closely
with the AFR and ANG on a phased implementation plan to transfer space
aligned missions, billets, resources, and personnel. The PMA ensures
that guardians serving in full-time and part-time work roles are
treated the same as similarly situated members of regular and Reserve
components, respectfully. If confirmed, I will review the
implementation plan and work to ensure that members of the ARC and ANG
are not disadvantaged in any way by volunteering to the Space Force.
Question. The Committee understands that personnel information
technology systems are the main obstacle preventing the Space Force
from implementing the Space Force Personnel Management Act
expeditiously.
If confirmed, how will you assist the Space Force acquire the
necessary technology required to implement the Space Force Personnel
Management Act?
Answer. The Space Force Personnel Management Act provides the
authority the Space Force needs to develop and implement a modern
military personnel system. It is my understanding that integration with
the legacy DAF and OSD personnel IT systems is one of the most
challenging lines of effort for implementing the PMA. If confirmed, I
will review the Space Force's resourcing and technology requirements
unhindered throughout the multi-year implementation process to ensure
that they meet congressional intent and take care of our guardians.
Question. Section 514 of the Servicemember Quality of Life
Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025
requires the Secretary of the Air Force to transfer to the Space Force
the covered space functions and personnel of the Air National Guard.
What is you understanding of when the transfer of the covered units
and equipment to the Space Force will occur, and what is the associated
plan for transferring personnel?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with Space Force, Air Force, and
National Guard leadership to develop a comprehensive plan for
transferring covered space functions and personnel who choose to
transfer from the Air National Guard to the Space Force within the
transition timeline established by Congress.
air force integrated pay and personnel system (afipps)
Question. The Committee is aware that the AFIPPS program continues
to struggle with significant schedule delays and cost overruns. This
program is essential for the Air Force to implement modern personnel
policy and for Air Force audit requirements.
What is your view of the importance of AFIPPS?
Answer. I understand AFIPPS modernizes DAF personnel and pay. If
confirmed, I will seek a detailed program briefing and, if needed,
collaborate with DAF leadership on a finalization strategy.
Question. If confirmed, what will you do to ensure AFIPPS delivers
the promised capability according to latest schedule and cost
estimates?
Answer. Caring for our people is paramount. If confirmed, I will
work with DAF leadership to understand this program's status and future
needs.
department of the air force civilian workforce
Question. How would you describe the current State of the
Department of the Air Force (including the Space Force) civilian
workforce, including its morale and the Department's ability to
successfully recruit and retain top civilian talent?
Answer. Civilians are vital to military readiness. If confirmed, I
will ensure the Department prioritizes hiring top talent for
warfighting-critical positions. I will also review the work environment
and employee engagement, adjusting as needed.
Question. In your judgment, what is the biggest challenge facing
the Air Force and Space Force in effectively and efficiently managing
their civilian workforce?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work with DAF leadership to understand
workforce management challenges. I will maximize congressional hiring
and compensation flexibilities, fostering a meritocratic, innovative
culture. I will commit to reviewing personnel processes for civilian
workforce management efficiencies.
Question. In your view, do Air Force and Space Force supervisors
have adequate authorities to address and remediate employee misconduct
and poor duty performance, and ultimately to divest of a civilian
employee who fails to meet requisite standards of conduct and
performance?
Answer. If confirmed, I am committed to hiring and retaining the
have the best people. If I am confirmed, I will review the
effectiveness of the numerous personnel management authorities and
systems and explore greater efficiencies. The Department must make
every effort to create a future-ready, agile and adaptive workforce
able to meet the rapidly evolving challenges of the 21st century.
Question. If so, are both civilian and military supervisors
adequately trained to exercise such authorities? If not, what
additional authorities or training do Air Force and Space Force
supervisors require?
Answer. If confirmed, I am committed to making sure the Department
continues to have the best people and that supervisors are properly
trained. If I am confirmed, I will review the effectiveness of the
numerous personnel management authorities and systems and explore
greater efficiencies. The Department must make every effort to create a
future-ready, agile and adaptive workforce able to meet the rapidly
evolving challenges of the 21st century.
senior executive service
Question. Given that competent and caring leadership is one of the
most significant factors in shaping a high-performing DOD civilian
workforce, if confirmed, what factors and characteristics would be most
important to you in selecting candidates for appointment to the Senior
Executive Service?
Answer. The Senior Executive Service is vital and if confirmed, I
will prioritize candidates with proven competence, strong character and
a commitment to a more efficient and effective Department.
Question. If confirmed, how would you ensure that SES under your
authority are held accountable for both organizational performance and
the rigorous performance management of their subordinate employees?
Answer. If confirmed, I will focus on ensuring the Senior Executive
Service is held accountable for achieving results. This involves
supporting SES leaders in fostering a culture of excellence within
their organizations. My leadership will emphasize clear expectations,
measurable outcomes, and consistent performance evaluations. High
achievers will be recognized, and underperformance will be addressed.
Question. Are you satisfied with the subject matter and rigor of
SES professional development programs currently available across DOD
and in the Air Force and Space Force? If not, what changes would you
make to these programs, if confirmed?
Answer. Professional development for our Senior Executive Service
(SES) cadre is critical to ensuring we have the strategic leadership
required for the complex challenges facing the Air and Space Forces. If
confirmed, I will review the DAF SES professional development programs
to ensure alignment with the DOD and DAF priorities.
domestic violence and child abuse in military families
Question. What is your understanding of the extent of domestic
violence and child abuse in the Air Force, and, if confirmed, what
actions would you take to address these issues?
Answer. I take the health and well-being of the force and our
military families extremely seriously. I recognize that domestic
violence and child abuse are serious issues that have no place, but do
exist. Domestic violence is a serious problem that impacts readiness in
the Department of the Air Force. If confirmed, I commit to ensuring
these issues are receiving the attention they deserve and the necessary
resources to support effective prevention and response.
military quality of life
Question. If confirmed, what quality of life and morale, welfare,
and recreation (MWR) programs would you consider to be a priority?
Answer. MWR programs are a necessity and go a long way toward
improving quality of life for military members and their families,
especially when stationed far from home. Fostering resilient and ready
families directly impacts readiness, recruitment, and retention of
military members. If confirmed, I will work with DAF leaders to
understand which programs are high in demand, and where new programs
may need to be introduced based on community needs.
Question. What metric would you apply in determining which MWR and
quality of life programs should be sustained or enriched and which
should be eliminated or reduced in scope as ineffective or outmoded?
Answer. MWR and quality of life are critical factors in readiness
and enable recruitment and retention. If confirmed, I will work with
senior leaders to conduct a review of existing MWR and quality of life
programs to assess the effectiveness of these programs in supporting
readiness.
military family readiness and support
Question. What do you consider to be the most important family
readiness issues for servicemembers and their families?
Answer. We recruit airmen and guardians but retain families. Press
reports suggest compensation, spousal employment, childcare, and food
insecurity challenge families. If confirmed, I will work with DAF
leaders to identify key challenges, assess existing support, and
develop enhanced strategies, advocating for necessary resources.
Question. If confirmed, what specific actions would you take to
ensure that military families are provided with accessible, high-
quality childcare, at an appropriate cost?
Answer. Military readiness requires affordable, quality childcare.
If confirmed, I will collaborate with DAF leaders to evaluate current
initiatives and explore opportunities to expand childcare options--
traditional, non-traditional, and community-based--for our airmen and
guardians.
congressional oversight
Question. In order to exercise its legislative and oversight
responsibilities, it is important that this Committee and other
appropriate committees of Congress are able to receive testimony,
briefings, reports, records (including documents and electronic
communications) and other information from the Department.
Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, and on request,
to appear and testify before this committee, its subcommittees, and
other appropriate committees of Congress? Please answer yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
provide this committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate committees
of Congress, and their respective staffs such witnesses and briefers,
briefings, reports, records (including documents and electronic
communications), and other information as may be requested of you, and
to do so in a timely manner? Please answer yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
consult with this committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate
committees of Congress, and their respective staffs, regarding your
basis for any delay or denial in providing testimony, briefings,
reports, records--including documents and electronic communications,
and other information requested of you? Please answer yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
keep this committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate committees of
Congress, and their respective staffs apprised of new information that
materially impacts the accuracy of testimony, briefings, reports,
records--including documents and electronic communications, and other
information you or your organization previously provided? Please answer
yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, and on
request, to provide this committee and its subcommittees with records
and other information within their oversight jurisdiction, even absent
a formal Committee request? Please answer yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
respond timely to letters to, and/or inquiries and other requests of
you or your organization from individual Senators who are members of
this committee? Please answer yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
ensure that you and other members of your organization protect from
retaliation any military member, Federal employee, or contractor
employee who testifies before, or communicates with this committee, its
subcommittees, and any other appropriate committee of Congress? Please
answer yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
______
[Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]
Questions Submitted by Senator Dan Sullivan
8(a) contracts
1. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lohmeier, the Small Business Act (SBA)
8(a) program, created by Congress, provides a contract vehicle through
which sole source and set aside contracts can be awarded to small
businesses owned by Alaska Native corporations, Community Development
Corporations, Indian tribes, and Native Hawaiian organizations. These
corporations are tied to political relationships, not racial
classifications. They also are some of our most efficient contractors,
earning stellar Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System
(CPARS) marks. Last many of these small businesses employ veterans at
rates far exceeding the national average, allowing our Nation's finest
to continue to serve after they take off the uniform. Will you commit
to me to work to preserve and strengthen 8(a) contracting for the
Department of the Defense?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, if confirmed, I will work with Congress, the
Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Department of the Air Force
Office of Small Business Programs (SAF/SB), and interagency partners
such as SBA on improving, preserving, and strengthening Section 8(a)
contracting and other Small Business Programs whenever using them would
be in the best interest of the Department of the Air Force. I
understand that the Section 8(a) Program and other Small Business
Programs have served as valuable tools for supporting the warfighters
and strengthening the defense industrial base while streamlining and
expediting defense acquisitions.
2. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lohmeier, I recently toured an SBA 8(a)
contracting operation and saw firsthand the value 8(a) brings to the
Federal customer in terms of cost and efficiency while delivering
mission-critical solutions that increase our national security and
warfighter readiness. 8(a) contracts represent the best ``bang for the
buck'' for taxpayers, giving contracting officers additional
flexibility while also maximizing efficiency by reducing red tape. Do
you see the value in increased efficiency in flexibility brought from
initiatives such as the 8(a) program?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, I understand that the Section 8(a) Program and
other Small Business Programs have served as valuable tools for
supporting the warfighters and strengthening the defense industrial
base while streamlining and expediting defense acquisitions. If
confirmed, I look forward to working with the Department of the Air
Force Office of Small Business Programs (SAF/SB) on promoting the use
of flexible and efficient contracting methods that Congress established
for Small Business Programs.
3. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lohmeier, rapid response capabilities are
essential to enable our warfighters to win on the battlefield. At the
same time, our defense contractors must rapidly respond to the needs of
our military to make the U.S. Military more lethal. Flexible and
efficient contracting through the SBA 8(a) program is one trusted way
to do this. Please explain how you will ensure that proven, dependable,
and cost-effective 8(a) programs remain in place and supported by the
Department of Defense.
Mr. Lohmeier. By law and guidance, the Under Secretary of the Air
Force directly supervises the Director, Department of the Air Force
Office of Small Business Programs (SAF/SB). If confirmed, I will ask
the Director, SAF/SB, to recommend actions that I can take as the Under
Secretary to ensure that Small Business Programs such as the Section
8(a) Program remain available to Department of the Air Force for
supporting warfighters and strengthening the defense industrial base
while streamlining and expediting defense acquisitions.
I will further work with Congress, the Office of the Secretary of
Defense, the Department of the Air Force Office of Small Business
Programs (SAF/SB), and interagency partners such as SBA on improving,
preserving, and strengthening Section 8(a) contracting and other Small
Business Programs whenever using them would be in the best interest of
the Department of the Air Force.
alaska
4. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lohmeier, on President Trump's first day
in office, he signed the Executive Order ``Unleashing Alaska's
Extraordinary Resource Potential.'' This sent a strong message to
Alaska, America, and the world, that unleashing Alaska's extraordinary
resources and jobs in a growing economy is one of his Administration's
top priorities. For years, I've worked toward the success of the Alaska
LNG project. Not only could Alaska LNG shipments provide our allies
with energy security, reaching them in 6 days without any strategic
choke points, but this pipeline crosses directly through some of our
most prominent military bases in my State, several of which have had
issues with supply. Now, purchase agreements and other ways to commit
to the project, beyond just the Department of Defense's (DOD) immediate
need, will help secure financing for the project quickly and at the
lowest cost in line with President Trump's America First Energy and
National Security agenda. Can I get your commitment to work with me on
the Alaska LNG (AKLNG) Project?
Mr. Lohmeier. If confirmed, I will work with Congress and other
stakeholders to identify and support projects that enhance the energy
security of our installations in Alaska and everywhere the Department
operates.[PD1]
5. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lohmeier, Eielson Air Force Base (AFB)
which in addition to being home to F-35 squadrons, F-16 interceptors,
and KC-135s along with hosting many nations each year for Red Flag
events, still needs many more ``warm'' facilities to house KC-135
airframes. It can only fit two right now. Additionally, other
infrastructure is very outdated, and facilities are not keeping pace
with Wainwright Army base. Will you work with me to acquire the
infrastructure necessary to hold the tankers?
Mr. Lohmeier. If confirmed, I will ensure infrastructure
requirements at Eielson AFB are properly assessed and prioritized to
support the critical missions being conducted from the installation.
6. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lohmeier, my State holds the highest
concentration of combat-coded fifth generation aircraft anywhere else
in the country (over 100). Any conflict in the Indo-Pacific region will
undoubtedly call upon Alaskan warfighters and our military assets. For
the last decade I've pressed every Chairman of the Joint Chiefs,
Secretary of the Air Force, and Chief of Staff of the Air Force on the
need for more aerial refueling assets in Alaska to support the
increasing training requirements and intercept missions.
Last year, I wrote a letter to your predecessor, Secretary Kendall,
pressing him to fulfill the Air Force's commitments on this issue and
Kendall replied with a signed memorandum finally codifying the movement
of 4x KC-135s to Eielson AFB in so called ``active association''. This
MUST NOT be delayed any longer.
Can I get your commitment that, if confirmed, you will see the
completion of that KC-135 basing through to the end?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, if confirmed, I commit to addressing previous
basing decisions at Eielson AFB. The tanker fleet is an essential
component of U.S. power projection, Homeland Defense, strategic
deterrence, global strike, rapid global mobility, and coordinated Joint
Force and coalition efforts. The Air Force will work closely with
theater MAJCOMs to ensure we source the three remaining KC-135 for
Eielson in a deliberate, efficient, and timely manner and commit to
providing you updates.
7. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lohmeier, can I also get your commitment
to work expedite the delivery time and increase the readiness rates of
the KC-46?
Mr. Lohmeier. I understand that the KC-46 is replacing a large
portion of the Air Force's tanker fleet and that it is progressing
toward full operational capability. If confirmed, I commit to working
with the Service Acquisition Executive and Boeing to resolve issues and
get us on the shortest path to delivering aircraft that fully meet
warfighter requirements.
8. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lohmeier, in our discussion in my office
we spoke about the need for additional hangar and infrastructure
capability at Deadhorse (near Prudhoe Bay) to help extend the Air
Force's reach in the Arctic. The U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM)
Commander, General Gregory Guillot, as well as the U.S. Pacific Air
Forces (PACAF) Commander, General Kevin Schneider, have both expressed
interest in this location. Will you work with me, if confirmed, to get
the military construction approved to support operations out of
Deadhorse?
Mr. Lohmeier. The Arctic is critical to our ability to defend the
homeland and project power internationally. If confirmed, I commit to
continuing to evaluate our posture in Alaska, and I will work with
Congress to ensure the Department has sufficient infrastructure to
support its missions and operations.
9. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lohmeier, the 18th Fighter Interceptor
Squadron (FIS) at Eielson AFB is responsible for interception of
Russian and Chinese strategic bombers and fighters that cross into the
Alaskan Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ). Oftentimes, however,
the 18th FIS is short of either pilots or mechanics to accomplish their
mission. They always do accomplish the mission, but often at great
extra cost in manpower and time (especially as intercepts have
increased in the last year). Will you commit to looking at the task
organization and real-life manning of this unit and its sustainers and
ensure that they are manned 100 percent to finish their mission?
Mr. Lohmeier. As the Air Force works to align with OSD on optimal
organizations toward the overall mission of warfighting, I am committed
to looking at all task organizations and real-life manning of all
fighter units and their sustainers to ensure they are effectively
manned to accomplish their mission.
10. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lohmeier, as you are aware I've been
fighting to get the KC-135 Active Association complete at Eielson AFB
for nearly a decade and your predecessor signed off on it. I appreciate
your commitment during your hearing to see this through to completion.
I've ran into a number of issues with the Air Force Site Activation
Task Force (SATF) which has visited Eielson nearly six times to conduct
housing surveys. It appears they are using housing data from 2023 to
make decisions regarding the amount of available housing at Eielson.
Will you commit to work with me to ensure that SATF is using the most
current housing data to inform its decisions about housing at Eielson
and to relook the Air Force's housing requirements as soon as possible
to ensure we are meeting mission need at the base?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes if, confirmed, I will review the housing data
being used by the DAF to inform housing requirements and ensure we are
using the most current data.
11. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lohmeier, as part of President Trump's
Golden Dome program, there will almost certainly be a need to ensure
that our advanced early warning radar systems like the E-7 are capable
of detecting incoming aircraft and missile threats both at home and if
necessary, forward deployed. We have had a number of issues in Alaska
with E-3 AWACS [Airborne Warning and Control System] readiness rates
due to aging airframes and parts. Will you commit to reviewing the E-7
program to make sure we are properly resourcing it and work with me to
ensure that we have that capability on hand when required in Alaska?
Mr. Lohmeier. I understand that enhanced airborne Battle Management
Command and Control (BMC2) and Airborne Moving Target Indicator (AMTI)
capabilities are essential to countering advanced and emerging
adversary air threats. If confirmed, I commit to reviewing the program
and working with the Service Acquisition Executive and the warfighter
to ensure we can deliver this generational advancement in radar
technology to replace the increasingly unreliable and unsustainable E-
3G.
12. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Lohmeier, one of the results of President
Biden's energy policies and the ``lock up'' of my State through his
executive orders is an energy emergency affecting our national security
that is unfolding on some Alaska bases. I spoke to Secretary Peter
Hegseth recently about this issue and explained to him that there have
been a number of instances where commanders of bases like Joint Base
Elmendorf-Richardson (JBER) in Anchorage had to tell servicemembers and
their families to turn down their heat, unplug personal property, and
turn-off certain critical systems that sustain the base. This was done
to preserve electricity and avoid brownouts in the region. Would U.S.
national security be enhanced if there was a reliable source of clean-
burning Alaskan natural gas available to supply the energy needs of
these bases?
Mr. Lohmeier. Expanding our access to available, but underutilized,
sources of energy, such as natural gas is important to power our
installations and achieve national energy dominance. If confirmed, I
will work with OSD, the Department of Energy, the Department of
Interior, and other stakeholders, such as our utility partners, to
identify potential solutions to ensure our installations have the power
they need to meet critical mission requirements.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Mazie K. Hirono
character and fitness to serve
13. Senator Hirono. Mr. Lohmeier, your public record raises serious
concerns about your judgment, professionalism, and ability to maintain
an apolitical, unified military. Given your track record of promoting
partisan conspiracy theories, why should this Committee believe you are
suddenly willing--or even able--to separate your personal politics from
your official duties?
Mr. Lohmeier. I am very proud of my military service which ended
with an honorable discharge. During my time in Service and for every
day after as a private citizen, I have been a champion for an
apolitical military and will continue to be. If confirmed, I commit to
dedicating myself to preserving a non-partisan Department of the Air
Force. I believe very strongly that protecting the institution from
partisanship is fundamental to our system of government.
14. Senator Hirono. Mr. Lohmeier, you have publicly suggested that
addressing racism, sexism, and extremism in the ranks is somehow more
dangerous than the extremism itself. How do you expect to build trust--
particularly among LGBTQ+ servicemembers, servicemembers of color, and
women--when your own statements dismiss the very real barriers they
face?
Mr. Lohmeier. My record shows an unblemished career of working with
airmen and guardians from all walks of life. Some of the best guardians
under my command in the Space Force were members of the LGBTQ+
community and I have publicly stated that for the record when
testifying before Congress in 2024. Unity is our strength, and I firmly
believe my record reflects a leadership style focused on that unity--
not division. If confirmed, I will continue to lead that way in the
Department of the Air Force.
apolitical environment
15. Senator Hirono. Mr. Lohmeier, civil-military relations are
foundational to the legitimacy of our Armed Forces. In this leadership
position, how would you enforce the Department of Defense's strict
prohibitions on political activity among Air Force and Space Force
personnel, including under title 10 authorities, to preserve an
apolitical military chain of command?
Mr. Lohmeier. It is well understood that servicemembers' political
activities are regulated, both in their official and personal
capacities. The First Amendment protects freedom of speech and permits
the expression of ideas for all Americans; however, servicemembers,
owing to their critical role in our national security, have accepted
limits on their freedom of expression. Strict regulations on political
activities among servicemembers ensure that personal political beliefs
do not interfere with mission readiness or decisionmaking. Those
safeguards protect the armed forces from external political pressures,
ensuring their primary focus remains on national security and defense.
I expect all DAF servicemembers to prudently exercise their individual
liberties consistent with these obligations of military service. Those
servicemembers who fail to abide by these regulations will be addressed
as appropriate, including through potential administrative or
disciplinary action under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).
acquisitions and supply chain challenges
16. Senator Hirono. Mr. Lohmeier, the Under Secretary must oversee
major acquisition programs and help safeguard the defense industrial
base, including partnerships with small businesses and innovation hubs.
Given recent supply chain disruptions and consolidation within the
defense industry, what concrete actions would you take to ensure
competition, speed, and resilience in Air Force and Space Force
acquisitions?
Mr. Lohmeier. It is important that the Department of Air Force
continues to increase efforts to take full advantage of the speed,
innovation, and capabilities offered by the commercial sector and the
competitive defense industrial base. If confirmed, I will partner with
my DOD counterparts and work with Congress to help ensure the
Department of the Air Force has the tools and resources to explore
flexible acquisitions to add speed, resilience, and increased program
execution efficiency while cultivating secure supply chains, addressing
workforce readiness, and utilizing economic deterrence as a tool to
protect our industrial and innovation base. I will also review current
commercial strategy and policy to ensure the Department is empowering
collaboration with domestic industry to grow the industrial base and
streamline technology maturation to satisfy emerging operational needs.
budget stewardship
17. Senator Hirono. Mr. Lohmeier, the Under Secretary of the Air
Force plays a critical role in the development and execution of the
Department's more than $200 billion annual budget. Can you walk this
Committee through your approach to balancing modernization priorities,
like Next Generation Air Dominance--against current operational
readiness?
Mr. Lohmeier. The primary challenge the DAF faces today lies in
creating the force we need to defeat our future adversaries while not
undercutting our ability to fight tonight. The Air Force is the
smallest and oldest it has ever been, and it needs to move ahead on
modernization to face the growing threat by investing in such
capabilities as F-47, Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCA), High Value
Air Asset (HVAA) protection, Air Base Air Defense (ABAD), and Long-
Range Kill Chain (LRKC). The USSF needs to grow in capacity and
capability, in mission areas such as Space Based Sensing and Targeting,
Counter-C5ISRT, Missile Warning, PNT, and SATCOM, with additional
lethal and resilient capabilities, including additional guardians to
develop, operate, and sustain those systems, to deter and prevail in a
complex competition with China.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Tim Kaine
characterization of the events of january 6, 2021
18. Senator Kaine. Mr. Lohmeier, did you author the social media
post below?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, and at the time of this post I had been out of
uniform for several years. I authored this as a private citizen freely
expressing my Constitutional right to free speech. It does not reflect
how I would express myself as a leader of the Department of the Air
Force, if confirmed.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Elizabeth Warren
ethics
19. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if you are confirmed, will you
commit not to seek any employment with or compensation from a defense
contractor, including through serving on a board, as a consultant, or
as a lobbyist, for 4 years after leaving DOD?
Mr. Lohmeier. I will abide by the extensive post-government
employment ethics rules required by Federal law. These provisions set
forth comprehensive restrictions relating to acceptance of compensation
from defense contractors, as well as communicating back to the Federal
Government on behalf of any future employers and clients. I believe
that these existing rules are appropriate and sufficient to protect the
public interest. If confirmed, I will carry out the responsibilities of
my office honorably, and I will seek any post-government employment in
full compliance with the applicable ethics rules.
20. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if you are confirmed, will you
commit not to engage in any lobbying activities, including unregistered
``shadow'' or ``behind-the-scenes'' lobbying under the guise of
consulting or advising, focused on DOD or any of its components for 4
years after leaving DOD?
Mr. Lohmeier. I will abide by the extensive post-government
employment ethics rules required by Federal law. These provisions set
forth comprehensive restrictions relating to acceptance of compensation
from defense contractors, as well as communicating back to the Federal
Government on behalf of any future employers and clients. I believe
that these existing rules are appropriate and sufficient to protect the
public interest. If confirmed, I will carry out the responsibilities of
my office honorably, and I will seek any post-government employment in
full compliance with the applicable ethics rules.
21. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, will you commit not to seek
employment, board membership with, or any other form of compensation
from a company that you regulated or otherwise interacted with while in
government, for at least 4 years after leaving office?
Mr. Lohmeier. I will abide by the extensive post-government
employment ethics rules required by Federal law. These provisions set
forth comprehensive restrictions relating to acceptance of compensation
from defense contractors, as well as communicating back to the Federal
Government on behalf of any future employers and clients. I believe
that these existing rules are appropriate and sufficient to protect the
public interest. If confirmed, I will carry out the responsibilities of
my office honorably, and I will seek any post-government employment in
full compliance with the applicable ethics rules.
22. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, during your nomination process,
did anyone on the Trump campaign, transition team, or other closely
related entity approach you about your loyalty to President Trump?
Mr. Lohmeier. No.
23. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if you were approached about your
loyalty to President Trump, did you sign a loyalty pledge or other
similar oath? If so, please provide a copy of the text of that pledge
or oath.
Mr. Lohmeier. Not applicable; I was not approached about my loyalty
to President Trump.
24. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if you were approached about your
loyalty to President Trump, did you make any verbal representations of
loyalty? If so, please describe this representation.
Mr. Lohmeier. Not applicable; I was not approached about my loyalty
to President Trump.
25. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, in November 2024, the New York
Times and other news outlets reported that Boris Epshteyn, a top
adviser to President Trump, allegedly requested payment from
prospective political appointees to promote their candidacies for top
positions within the Administration. Did you discuss the possibility of
joining the Administration with Mr. Epshteyn at any time?
Mr. Lohmeier. No.
26. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if you did discuss the
possibility of joining the Administration with Mr. Epshteyn, did Mr.
Epshteyn seek payment from you for promoting your candidacy for a
position within the Administration?
Mr. Lohmeier. Not applicable; I was not approached.
27. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, at any time, did lawyers for
President Trump or members of President Trump's team approach you
regarding Mr. Epshteyn and the allegations cited above? If so, please
describe the information that they provided you (including copies of
documents), what was discussed during any calls, and any other
information pertaining to this interaction.
Mr. Lohmeier. No.
28. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, were you in contact with Mr. Elon
Musk at any time during your nomination process? If so, please describe
the nature of those contacts.
Mr. Lohmeier. No.
29. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, was Mr. Musk present or involved
in any interviews you did related to your nomination? If so, please
describe the nature of his involvement.
Mr. Lohmeier. I am a nominee of the President of the United States,
and in the interview process, the President asked me questions. I'm
extremely honored that President Trump had the faith and confidence to
nominate me for the position of Under Secretary of the Air Force.
30. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, was Mr. Musk involved in any way
with your nomination, including but not limited to directly or
indirectly contacting Senators regarding their position on your
nomination?
Mr. Lohmeier. No, not to my knowledge.
31. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, who was in the room or
participated in any of your interviews regarding your nomination?
Mr. Lohmeier. Various staffers were present for my interview,
including staffers from the Presidential Personnel Office and the
Department of Defense. I'm extremely honored that President Trump had
the faith and confidence to nominate me for the position of Under
Secretary of the Air Force.
32. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if you own any stock or hold any
other interest in any defense industry contractors, will you divest it
to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest?
Mr. Lohmeier. The Ethics Agreement I signed on March 14, 2025,
which was previously provided to the Committee, sets forth my ethics
commitments, if confirmed.
33. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what do you consider the role of
the press in a democracy?
Mr. Lohmeier. The freedom of the press is protected under the First
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I firmly believe that a free and
open press is an essential element to the functioning of a legitimate
democracy.
34. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you think it would be an
appropriate use of taxpayer resources to ``dig up dirt'' on journalists
who investigate or criticize you, your office, or the Trump
administration?
Mr. Lohmeier. No.
35. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, will you commit not to retaliate,
including by denying access to government officials or facilities,
against news outlets or individual journalists who publish articles
that are critical of you, your office, your agency, or the Trump
administration?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes.
36. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, have you requested, or has anyone
requested on your behalf, that any other person or third party sign a
nondisclosure, confidentiality, non-disparagement, or similar agreement
regarding your conduct in a personal or professional capacity?
Mr. Lohmeier. No.
37. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, will you voluntarily release any
individual from any such agreements before this committee votes on your
nomination?
Mr. Lohmeier. Not applicable; I have not requested such agreements,
nor has anyone done so on my behalf.
38. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, have you ever paid or promised to
pay, or has anyone paid or promised to pay on your behalf, an
individual as part of any non-disclosure, confidentiality, non-
disparagement, or similar agreement?
Mr. Lohmeier. No.
39. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if the answer to the previous
question was yes, how much was promised, how much was paid, and what
were the circumstances?
Mr. Lohmeier. Not applicable.
40. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, will you commit to recuse
yourself from all particular matters involving your former clients and
employers for the duration of your service at DOD?
Mr. Lohmeier. The Ethics Agreement I signed on March 14, 2025,
which was previously provided to the Committee, sets forth my ethics
commitments, if confirmed.
41. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, please provide a list of all your
clients at Lohmeier Consulting LLC within the last 5 years.
Mr. Lohmeier. Lohmeier Consulting LLC is the name of a Single-
Member/Sole Proprietorship LLC that I created three and a half years
ago at the time I separated from Active Duty in September 2021. I had
no standing or permanent clients. My clients consisted of various local
event organizers (often volunteer based non-profits) in states across
the country (such as Arizona Women of Action, in Arizona) who would
reach out asking if I would speak at events they had organized.
Sometimes those events included an honorarium and sometimes I spoke at
no cost.
congressional oversight and transparency
42. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what is your understanding of the
role of the Department of Defense Inspector General and service
Inspectors General?
Mr. Lohmeier. Inspectors General promote integrity and
accountability throughout the Department by investigating allegations
of fraud, waste, and abuse, and misconduct. IGs also serve as a
confidential avenue for reporting wrongdoing and protecting
whistleblowers. Their oversight helps maintain public trust and ensures
the Department operates effectively and ethically. Crucially, they
provide impartial recommendations to the Secretary of Defense and
Congress based on their findings, driving necessary reforms and
improvements within the Department. By identifying systemic issues and
holding individuals accountable, the Inspector General system
contributes directly to a more efficient, effective, trustworthy,
ready, and lethal defense apparatus.
43. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, will you ensure your staff
complies with any Inspector General deadlines established for requested
communications, documents, and witnesses, and that staff will be
protected from reprisal for their testimony?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes.
44. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if you are not able to comply
with any Inspector General requests and deadlines, will you notify the
Republican and Democratic members of this committee regarding the basis
for any good faith delay or denial?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes.
45. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if you are confirmed, will you
commit to refusing to follow illegal orders from any individual,
including the President?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, and I do not believe the President would issue
an illegal order.
46. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what actions would you take if
you were given an illegal order from any individual, including the
President?
Mr. Lohmeier. I reject the premise of this question. The President
would never order me to take an illegal action. If confirmed, I would
work with appropriate personnel such as the General Counsel's Office if
given a directive that I believed was illegal.
47. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, will you commit to voluntarily
provide a deposition if you are requested by Congress to provide one?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes.
48. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, will you commit to voluntarily
testify in front of Congress if you are requested by Congress to do so?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes.
49. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, will you commit to testify or
provide a deposition in front of Congress if you are issued a subpoena
to do so?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes.
50. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, will you commit to providing
information or documents to Congress voluntarily if you are requested
to do so?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, if permitted under governing laws and
regulations.
51. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, will you provide information or
documents to Congress if you are issued a subpoena to do so?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, if permitted under governing laws and
regulations.
52. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, will you commit to following
current precedent for responding to information requests, briefings,
and other inquiries from Congress, including the Senate and House Armed
Services Committees and their minority members?
Mr. Lohmeier. I do not have enough information as I am not familiar
with the full extent of current precedent. However, if confirmed, I
commit to being responsive to this Committee and this Congress.
53. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if confirmed, will you commit to
posting your official calendar monthly?
Mr. Lohmeier. If confirmed, I commit to meeting all legal
disclosure requirements.
54. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you think the Federal
Government has an overclassification problem? If so, please provide
examples of overclassification you have encountered.
Mr. Lohmeier. In general, I believe enabling access to information
rapidly and as broadly as possible is vital to national security. If
confirmed, I commit to working with the Secretary as well as my
colleagues throughout the Department to ensure data is properly
classified.
55. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if confirmed, do you think your
department should pursue strategic technology to support automated
declassification?
Mr. Lohmeier. I am not familiar with these strategic technologies,
but, if confirmed, I commit to receiving a brief on what options may be
available to the Department.
project 2025
56. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, have you discussed Project 2025
with any officials associated with the Trump campaign, the Trump
transition team, or other members of the Trump administration? If so,
please explain what you discussed, when you discussed it, and with whom
you discussed it.
Mr. Lohmeier. No.
57. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, have you discussed Project 2025
with any officials associated with the Heritage Foundation? If so,
please explain what you discussed, when you discussed it, and with whom
you discussed it.
Mr. Lohmeier. No.
foreign influence
58. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, have you received any payment
from a foreign government or entity controlled by a foreign government
within the past 5 years?
Mr. Lohmeier. No.
59. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, have you communicated with any
foreign government or entity controlled by a foreign government within
the past 5 years?
Mr. Lohmeier. I have provided relevant information in connection
with my background check.
60. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, please disclose any
communications or payments you have had with representatives of any
foreign government or entity controlled by a foreign government within
the past 5 years and describe the nature of the communication.
Mr. Lohmeier. I have provided relevant information in connection
with my background check.
impoundment control act
61. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you believe the Secretary of
Defense, or the Secretary of Energy has the legal authority to block
the disbursement of funds appropriated by Congress?
Mr. Lohmeier. I fully acknowledge and respect Congress'
constitutional role in appropriating funds to be carried out by the
executive branch for designated purposes. I commit, if confirmed, to
executing my responsibilities consistent with the Constitution and the
law. I would ensure that my actions and advice to the Secretary of
Defense on this matter are informed by the Administration's legal
positions and advice from the Department's General Counsel's office.
62. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what is your understanding of the
Impoundment Control Act?
Mr. Lohmeier. My understanding is that Congress passed the
Impoundment Control Act in 1974. This Act provides a framework for
handling circumstances in which the President seeks to defer or cancel
execution of appropriated funds. I commit, if confirmed, to executing
my responsibilities consistent with the Constitution and the law on
this matter as on all others. I would ensure that my actions and advice
to the Secretary of Defense on this matter are informed by the
Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
General Counsel's office.
63. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you commit to complying with
the Impoundment Control Act?
Mr. Lohmeier. If confirmed, I commit to following all laws.
64. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you commit to notifying the
Senate and House Armed Services Committees, including the majority and
minority, if you are asked not to comply with the Impoundment Control
Act or not to expend the money that Congress appropriates or
authorizes?
Mr. Lohmeier. If confirmed, I commit to complying with applicable
legal requirements regarding responding to requests from Congress.
65. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, the Constitution's Spending
Clause (Art. I, Sec. 8, cl. 1) and Appropriations Clause (Art. I,
Sec. 9, cl. 7) give Congress, not the Executive, power of the purse.
The Supreme Court has unanimously upheld this power. Do you believe
that impoundments are constitutional?
Mr. Lohmeier. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
responsibilities consistent with the Constitution and the law on this
matter as on all others. I would ensure that my actions and advice on
this matter are informed by the Administration's legal positions and
advice from the Department's General Counsel's office.
66. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, the funding levels in
appropriations bills passed into law are not targets or ceilings;
instead, they are amounts the executive branch must spend, unless
stated otherwise. Congress could--if it wanted the President to have
discretion--write those amounts as ceilings. Do you agree?
Mr. Lohmeier. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
responsibilities consistent with the Constitution and the law on this
matter as on all others. I would ensure that my actions and advice on
this matter are informed by the Administration's legal positions and
advice from the Department's General Counsel's office.
67. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what is your understanding of the
requirements for DOD to obligate funding that Congress authorizes and
appropriates, in accordance with the time period that Congress deems it
to do so?
Mr. Lohmeier. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
responsibilities consistent with the Constitution and the law on this
matter as on all others. I would ensure that my actions and advice on
this matter are informed by the Administration's legal positions and
advice from the Department's General Counsel's office.
68. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you commit to expending the
money that Congress appropriates and authorizes?
Mr. Lohmeier. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
responsibilities consistent with the Constitution and the law on this
matter as on all others. I would ensure that my actions and advice on
this matter are informed by the Administration's legal positions and
advice from the Department's General Counsel's office.
69. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you commit to following and
implementing every provision of the annual National Defense
Authorization Act passed into law?
Mr. Lohmeier. If confirmed, I commit to following all laws.
70. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if you became aware of a
potential violation of the Antideficiency Act, Impoundment Control Act,
or other appropriations laws, what steps would you take?
Mr. Lohmeier. If confirmed, I commit to following all laws.
research and development
71. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, does the Federal Government
benefit from partnering with colleges, universities, nonprofits, and
federally funded research and development centers?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes. By partnering with colleges, universities,
nonprofits, and federally funded research and development centers, the
Federal Government leverages unique analytical, engineering, and
research capabilities and cutting-edge facilities that complement our
own Federal workforce and laboratory infrastructure. Active
partnerships with academia also build the pipeline for future Federal
scientists and engineers with the competency to take on the hard
technical problems associated with developing military technologies to
support our warfighters.
72. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, under your leadership, will your
agencies continue to work with colleges, universities, nonprofits, and
federally funded research and development centers to research and
address our toughest national security challenges?
Mr. Lohmeier. If confirmed, I will support these strategic
partnerships as a force multiplier to our DOD-internal workforce. The
scientists, engineers, and researchers in colleges, universities,
nonprofits, and federally funded research and development centers
possess world-unique expertise and facilities in many areas where the
government cannot attract and retain personnel in sufficient depth and
numbers. I understand these partnerships are an important enabler to
the DOD's enduring technological superiority both domestically and
abroad.
information air dominance center
73. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you support the Air Force
creating a new Information Dominance Center?
Mr. Lohmeier. It is my understanding that the intent of the IDSC is
to consolidate and increase Air Force focus on information dominance
capabilities, including Command, Control, Communications, and Battle
Management (C3BM); Cyber; Electromagnetic[DC2] Warfare (EW);
Information Systems; and Enterprise Digital Infrastructure. If
confirmed, I look forward to receiving an in-depth briefing on this
reorganization effort, reviewing the data and analysis behind it, and
making my own assessment.
74. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what do you see as the role of a
new Information Dominance Systems Center in supporting great power
competition?
Mr. Lohmeier. It is my understanding that the intent of the IDSC is
to consolidate and increase Air Force focus on information dominance
capabilities, including Command, Control, Communications, and Battle
Management (C3BM); Cyber; Electromagnetic Warfare (EW); Information
Systems; and Enterprise Digital Infrastructure. If confirmed, I look
forward to better understanding the role of the IDSC and making my own
assessment on how it would support the priorities outlined in the
Interim National Security Guidance.
protecting classified information and federal records
75. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what is your understanding of the
need to protect operational security, or OPSEC?
Mr. Lohmeier. OPSEC is of paramount importance and is everyone's
responsibility in the Department of Defense. As a U.S Air Force and U.S
Space Force veteran, I have a strong record of practicing OPSEC to
protect information [M(3]and encouraging all members of my organization
to do likewise.
76. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what are the national security
risks of improperly disclosing classified information?
Mr. Lohmeier. Improper disclosure of classified information could
cause irreparable damage to national security, endanger personnel,
compromise military operations, weaken national defenses, and point to
potential cybersecurity vulnerabilities. Additionally, it can damage
international trust and confidence in the U.S., leading to a weakening
of alliances and reduced willingness to share sensitive information.
And, in line with General Caine's testimony, we should always strive to
preserve the element of surprise.
77. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what would you do if you learned
an official had improperly disclosed classified information?
Mr. Lohmeier. I would follow National Security protocols to address
mishandling of classified information and mitigate risks. When such a
disclosure is brought to my attention, I would consult with my security
and classification management team and legal counsel and request an
investigation be conducted to assess any damage, with the results from
the investigation be provided to leadership and the Department for any
pending action.
78. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what is your understanding of
government officials' duties under the Federal Records Act?
Mr. Lohmeier. It is the responsibility of every government official
to safeguard government activities and transactions in accordance with
the laws and regulations. The DAF implements the Federal Records Act
working closely with other Federal agencies such as the National
Archives and Records Administration. The Department is actively
pursuing a Federal Records Act initiative to modernize strategies as
well as improving overall processes via technology, such as
implementing tagging for records data, automating record filing, and
utilizing eDiscovery processes to retrieve records within records
schedules--ensuring compliance and easing the burdens on our airmen and
guardians.
79. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, should classified information be
shared on unclassified commercial systems?
Mr. Lohmeier. No.
retaliation and protecting whistleblowers
80. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you believe that
servicemembers, civilians, grantees, and contractors should be
protected from any form of retaliation for coming forward about an
illegal order, sexual assault or harassment, negligence, misconduct, or
any other concern that they wish to raise?
Mr. Lohmeier. I believe in following all laws, including those
protecting whistleblowers. If confirmed, I commit to following all
laws.
81. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, have you ever retaliated against
any individual for coming forward about an illegal order, sexual
assault or harassment, negligence, misconduct, or any other concern
that they wish to raise?
Mr. Lohmeier. No.
82. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if you are confirmed, will you
commit to protecting whistleblowers? If so, please specify how you will
do so.
Mr. Lohmeier. I believe in following all laws, including those
protecting whistleblowers. If confirmed, I commit to following all
laws.
83. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if you are confirmed, will you
commit to preventing retaliation against any individual for coming
forward about an illegal order, sexual assault or harassment,
negligence, misconduct, or any other concern that they wish to raise?
Mr. Lohmeier. I believe in following all laws, including those
protecting whistleblowers. If confirmed, I commit to following all
laws.
84. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you consider it to be
retaliation to demote an individual, prevent the promotion or
advancement of an individual, remove an individual from the military or
their role, or take other adverse actions related to personnel
decisions for an individual, in response to that individual engaging in
protected activity?
Mr. Lohmeier. I do not have enough information based on this
question to provide an answer. However, I believe in following all
laws, including those protecting whistleblowers. If confirmed, I commit
to following all laws.
85. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you consider it to be
retaliation to encourage another person(s) to demote an individual,
prevent the promotion or advancement of an individual, remove an
individual from the military or their role, or take other adverse
actions related to personnel decisions for an individual, in response
to that individual engaging in protected activity?
Mr. Lohmeier. I do not have enough information based on this
question to provide an answer. However, I believe in following all
laws, including those protecting whistleblowers. If confirmed, I commit
to following all laws.
86. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you support President Trump's
proposal to create a board to review and purge three-and four-star
officers?
Mr. Lohmeier. I am not familiar with any discussions regarding such
a board. Under our system of government, the civilian leadership must
remain in a higher position hierarchically than the military
leadership. As such, I believe that civilian leadership has a right to
choose their advisors.
87. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if you support President Trump's
proposal to create a board to review and purge three-and four-star
officers, what criteria would you use for any board to review three-and
four-star officers to determine whether these officers are fit for
leadership and for selecting who will be appointed to be the board?
Mr. Lohmeier. Not applicable; I am not familiar with any such board
or discussions about such a board.
88. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, have you or do you plan to
recommend the Trump administration remove specific officers?
Mr. Lohmeier. No. If confirmed, my focus will be on assisting the
Secretary of the Air Force with their title 10 responsibility to
organize, train, and equip the Department of the Air Force.
89. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what is your justification for
their removal, including your assessment of their character and
leadership?
Mr. Lohmeier. Not applicable. If confirmed, my focus will be on
assisting the Secretary of the Air Force with their Title 10
responsibility to organize, train, and equip the Department of the Air
Force.
90. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what do you think a servicemember
or officer should do if they discover wrongdoing or are asked to follow
orders that they believe to be illegal or in violation of the
Constitution?
Mr. Lohmeier. Our oath is to support and defend the Constitution
and only follow lawful orders. I have a long record of doing just that.
If confirmed, I commit to continuing that record and will encourage all
in the Department of the Air Force to do so.
91. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what should the criteria be for
reducing the rank of base commanders?
Mr. Lohmeier. In general, I believe all commanders should be held
accountable and I believe the Nation expects accountability throughout
the Department. Adverse administrative actions are already captured
under governing regulations, and I have no reason to believe they are
not already sufficient. If confirmed, I commit to upholding the core
values of Integrity First, Service Before Self, and Excellence in All
We Do.
92. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what steps will you take to make
clear that officers should report orders that they believe are illegal?
Mr. Lohmeier. Alongside the Secretary, if confirmed, I commit that
consistent communication on the importance of adhering to the law will
be a hallmark of my tenure.
january 6th attack on the u.s. capitol
93. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, on August 9, 2024, in a tweet you
referred to January 6 as ``a gov't led false flag and hoax at the
Capitol.'' Do you still agree with this statement? If not, why did you
make it?
Mr. Lohmeier. I authored this as a private citizen freely
expressing my Constitutional right to free speech. It does not reflect
how I would express myself as a leader of the Department of the Air
Force and a representative of that institution, if confirmed.
94. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you believe that January 6th
was a false flag operation and on what basis?
Mr. Lohmeier. My statements in the past on this topic were authored
as a private citizen freely expressing my Constitutional right to free
speech. They do not reflect how I would express myself as a leader of
the Department of the Air Force and a representative of that
institution, if confirmed.
95. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, why do you believe that there
were ``undercover government agents at the Capitol on January 6?''
Mr. Lohmeier. I read it in a report by the Department of Justice
(DOJ) Inspector General, released on December 11, 2024, which
specifically addresses the FBI's handling of confidential human sources
(CHSs) on January 6. The report confirms that there were 26 FBI CHSs in
Washington, DC, that day. Three of those informants had specific tasks
from the FBI. Twenty-three others attended on their own initiative, 3
of whom entered the Capitol and 11 of whom entered restricted areas.
96. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, on the evening prior to President
Biden's inauguration, you watched a Tucker Carlson Tonight episode
focused on the aftermath of January 6th and stated that, ``The
progressive Left's appalling invective had reached an unbelievably low,
mean, and accusatory State. I recognized that kind of speech. It was
the ideologically possessed rhetoric of genocide.'' Do you still stand
by that statement and if so, why?
Mr. Lohmeier. This statement must be understood in the context of
the entire book from which it was extracted and not in isolation. The
warning of the last chapter of my book Irresistible Revolution is that
the country is dangerously polarized, and that a country ``cannot
persist in the hate-filled demonization of entire groups of people
based on their race or political affiliation'' without it leading
eventually to violence. My message in the book was an invitation for
our servicemembers to ``avoid the anger of partisan politics'' and to
avoid the demonization of entire groups of people based on their race
or political affiliation. I invited uniformed servicemembers to not
participate in this divisive rhetoric and to ``never use your position
of authority to unduly propound partisan political views. To do so is
to undermine good order and discipline.'' (reference chapter 7 of the
book in question)
criticisms of the left
97. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you agree that it is essential
for the military to remain an apolitical institution? If confirmed, do
you commit to ensuring that the military remains apolitical?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, this is a topic I am passionate about. If
confirmed, I commit to ensuring the military remains an apolitical
institution.
98. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, is it appropriate to punish,
promote, demote, or take other personnel actions against military
personnel for their political views? If you think it is, under what
circumstances?
Mr. Lohmeier. Servicemembers are required to abide by guidance
found in DOD Directives governing political activities for members of
the armed forces. Violations of those directives should be
appropriately addressed. If confirmed, I will continue to advocate that
servicemembers abide by these governing DOD regulations.
99. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, on January 12, 2024, you stated
that ``I believe Democrats' obsession with uniformity--and love affair
with DEI [diversity, equity, and inclusion]--is the result of a
possession of the Communist spirit.'' Do you still agree with this
statement? If not, why did you make it?
Mr. Lohmeier. I believe that context is important regarding these
statements. I made them as a private citizen freely expressing my
Constitutional right to free speech. As a private citizen, I have often
criticized and or warned that the military was losing its focus on
lethality. However, these statements do not reflect how I would express
myself as a leader of the Department of the Air Force and a
representative of that institution, if confirmed.
100. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, on December 24, 2023, you stated
that ``Democrats still lynch those who fight against DEI initiatives.
They only go as far as is socially permissible, but they are possessed
of the same spirit they've always been.'' What do you mean by this
statement and do you still agree with it? If you no longer agree with
it, why did you make it?
Mr. Lohmeier. I do not recall ever having made this statement. I
have searched but cannot find any online content suggesting I've ever
made this statement. Statements like this do not reflect how I would
express myself as a leader of the Department of the Air Force and a
representative of that institution, if confirmed.
101. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, on April 1, 2023, you stated
that, ``Of all that is good and decent the Left is the real
oppressor.'' Do you still agree with this statement? If not, why did
you make it?
Mr. Lohmeier. I can find no evidence that I ever made such a
statement. If I did, I made it as a private citizen freely expressing
my Constitutional right to free speech. These statements do not reflect
how I would express myself as a leader of the Department of the Air
Force and a representative of that institution, if confirmed..
102. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, on March 30, 2023, you stated
that, ``The left is always pointing fingers at conservatives for
inciting violence, but they are the ones guilty of it. It's always
someone else's fault. The left is sick.'' Do you still agree with this
statement? If not, why did you make it?
Mr. Lohmeier. If I made this statement, I made it as a private
citizen freely expressing my Constitutional right to free speech. These
statements do not reflect how I would express myself as a leader of the
Department of the Air Force and a representative of that institution,
if confirmed.
103. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, you wrote in reference to a
Tucker Carlson Tonight episode that, ``Again, the reason his remarks
are relevant is because they reveal the rhetorical demonization of
conservatives and whites in the country. It is specifically the kind of
rhetoric necessary to justify violence against people.'' You also wrote
that, ``To be perfectly clear, the path we are on as a country leads to
fratricidal and genocidal warfare.'' Do you stand by these statements
and do you believe that our country is on the path to fratricidal and
genocidal warfare?
Mr. Lohmeier. These statements must be understood in the context of
the entire book from which they were extracted and not in isolation.
The warning of the last chapter of my book Irresistible Revolution is
that the country is dangerously polarized, and that a country ``cannot
persist in the hate-filled demonization of entire groups of people
based on their race or political affiliation'' without it leading
eventually to violence. My message in the book was an invitation for
our servicemembers to ``avoid the anger of partisan politics'' and to
avoid the demonization of entire groups of people based on their race
or political affiliation.
104. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you believe any of the above
statements reflect servicemembers who consider themselves to be
Democrats or on the Left? If so, which statements do you consider
accurate regarding servicemembers?
Mr. Lohmeier. The statements I have made that are partisan in
nature have been made as a private citizen in this country. I always
honored and acted true to my obligation to remain apolitical while
wearing the uniform of the country. Our uniformed servicemembers are
entitled to their own private political views, but their expression of
those views and their conduct are strictly governed by law and DOD
regulations. Our men and women in uniform set aside their political
differences to focus on what unites them in accomplishing a mission in
defense of our country.
105. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you think it is appropriate
for a leader to disparage those they lead as having ``a possession of
the Communist spirit'' or ``the real oppressor,'' or lynch[ing] those
who fight against DEI initiatives,'' or ``sick''?
Mr. Lohmeier. My record shows an unblemished career of working with
airmen and guardians from all walks of life. I have had members under
my command who did not know my political views, nor I theirs. I believe
that is as it should be. I have never disparaged those I have led.
Unity is our strength, and I firmly believe my record reflects a
leadership style focused on that unity--not division. If confirmed, I
will continue to lead that way in the Department of the Air Force.
lgbtq+ servicemembers
106. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, on August 26, 2024, you stated,
``Wow-Military families are facing terrible decisions about whether to
continue serving or to pull their kids out of the DOD education
environment to save their children from gender-fluid/queer/trans
cults.'' Do you stand by this statement? Please explain what you mean
by ``gender-fluid/queer/trans cults.''
Mr. Lohmeier. I believe that context is important regarding these
statements. I made them as a private citizen freely expressing my
Constitutional right to free speech. They do not necessarily reflect
how I would express myself as a leader of the Department of the Air
Force and a representative of that institution, if confirmed.
107. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, on May 23, 2024, you stated
that, ``Military leaders cannot pretend to care about solving the
problem of sexual assaults in the military while also propagating
mental illness and celebrating sexual deviance.'' Do you stand by this
statement? Please explain what you mean by ``mental illness'' and
``sexual deviance.''
Mr. Lohmeier. I believe that context is important regarding these
statements. I made them as a private citizen freely expressing my
Constitutional right to free speech. They do not necessarily reflect
how I would express myself as a leader of the Department of the Air
Force and a representative of that institution, if confirmed.
108. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, on May 15, 2024, you stated that
a May 13, 2024, memorandum ``admonishes servicemembers to celebrate and
honor the lifestyle and contributions of lesbians, gays, bisexuals,
transgenders and queers . . . The memorandum `empowers commanders' to
`organize' activities for their bases. It is a revolutionary campaign
that no longer needs to hide its aims. It employs all of the right
revolutionary language. It is Marxist-rooted DEI at its best. It is
evil. If you are in uniform, now is the time for you to speak up
against this as if the life of your country depends on it, because it
does . . . Feigned kindness in the face of evil is only foolishness.
Tolerance of this revolutionary spirit at this critical hour is little
short of treasonous. Cowardice is the opposite of faith and love.'' Do
you stand by these statements?
Mr. Lohmeier. I believe that context is important regarding these
statements. I made them as a private citizen freely expressing my
Constitutional right to free speech. They do not necessarily reflect
how I would express myself as a leader of the Department of the Air
Force and a representative of that institution, if confirmed.
109. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you believe that members of
the LGBTQ+ community, including servicemembers and their families, are
``evil''?
Mr. Lohmeier. No, and I never said that.
110. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you believe that members of
the LGBTQ+ community, including servicemembers and their families, are
``treasonous''?
Mr. Lohmeier. No, and I never said that.
111. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you believe that those who
support the LGBTQ+ community, including servicemembers and their
families, are ``evil''?
Mr. Lohmeier. No, and I never said that.
112. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you believe that those who
support LGBTQ+ community, including servicemembers and their families,
are ``treasonous''?
Mr. Lohmeier. No, and I never said that.
113. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, on July 1, 2023, you stated that
a transgender servicemember was ``weak, mentally and physically, and
needs a different environment to work out [her] problems.'' Do you
believe that transgender people are mentally and physically weak?
Mr. Lohmeier. No, and I did not make such a generalization.
114. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, in response to a tweet from
another user who posted about an openly transgender female fighter, you
tweeted, ``A mental health epidemic celebrated by the left and forced
into the rest.'' Do you stand by this statement, and do you believe
that being transgender means someone is part of a ``mental health
epidemic''?
Mr. Lohmeier. I believe that context is important regarding these
statements. I made them as a private citizen freely expressing my
Constitutional right to free speech. They do not necessarily reflect
how I would express myself as a leader of the Department of the Air
Force and a representative of that institution, if confirmed.
115. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, how do you think Department of
Defense leaders making statements like the above hurts recruitment and
morale for servicemembers with LGBTQ+ children?
Mr. Lohmeier. I do not have access to the data that would assist in
making a determination as to whether such statements are having a
negative effect on recruiting or morale.
116. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, did you ever support ``Don't
Ask, Don't Tell''?
Mr. Lohmeier. I support the law. If confirmed, I will continue to
uphold the law.
117. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you currently support ``Don't
Ask, Don't Tell''?
Mr. Lohmeier. I support the law. If confirmed, I will continue to
uphold the law.
118. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you believe that LGBTQ+
servicemembers should be able to openly serve in our military?
Mr. Lohmeier. I support the Department's policy of allowing all to
serve as long as they can meet the standards without accommodation.
119. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, do you expect to meet recruiting
goals and attract the most effective future leaders if you continue to
insult and denigrate servicemembers who are part of the LGBTQ+
community?
Mr. Lohmeier. I reject the premise of this question. I do not
desire to insult or denigrate any servicemembers.
investigations
120. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, did you receive permission from
any component of the Department of Defense to publish your book,
Irresistible Revolution: Marxism's Goal of Conquest & the Unmaking of
the American Military?
Mr. Lohmeier. No. However, I consulted with and received legal
counsel from my base judge advocate general and consulted with and
received advice from DOD public affairs before publication. My purpose
in consulting with them was to understand my legal obligations as well
as DOD policy and I acted consistent with their advice and counsel.
121. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, were you advised by public
affairs personnel or any other individuals that the pre-publication
review of your book was unnecessary? Please provide a copy of any
correspondence or documentation that confirms this.
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, I was advised by both my base judge advocate
general and a DOD public affairs officer that prepublication review was
unnecessary given the academic/historical nature of the work.
Unfortunately, I do not have written correspondence or documentation
confirming this. DOD may still have these files on hand.
122. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, after you were relieved as the
commander of the 11th Space Warning Squadron at Buckley Air Force Base
but were still an Active Duty servicemember, you went on the Sean
Hannity Show and said that communications were sent out to every base
to prepare for the Department's ``extremism down-days'' and that these
communications ``taught that the country was evil. That it was founded
in 1619 not 1776. And that Whites are inherently evil.'' The Department
of Defense provided training videos to Fox News that contradicted your
claims. Do you still stand by these statements?
Mr. Lohmeier. The interview in question was taken in my personal
capacity, which was indicated at the beginning of the interview. In the
interview, I accurately communicated the guidance that servicemembers
had received from the Department, and I advocated for an apolitical
military, and said that my standard as a commander was to not tolerate
any discrimination based on race or political affiliation. However,
what I said has been mischaracterized in the question above. I stand by
the comments I made during that interview in their full context, but
those comments were made in reference to what was being taught and
discussed at my base specifically. The partisan and anti-American
rhetoric at my base were the subject of a formal written complaint to
the Space Force IG in November 2020, over a half-year before my book
was published.
123. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, did the Air Force Inspector
General launch an investigation about your conduct relating to the
complaint made to the Air Force Inspector General dated May 14, 2021?
Mr. Lohmeier. To the best of my knowledge, the Air Force Inspector
General did launch an investigation into my conduct; however, I am not
aware of ``the complaint'' referenced.
124. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, did the Air Force Inspector
General complete any investigation on your conduct?
Mr. Lohmeier. My present understanding is that completion of the
investigation was deemed unnecessary due to my voluntary separation
from the Service. However, shortly after I separated, I was informed by
phone that the investigation had been ``closed,'' and that neither I
nor then-Lt Gen Stephen Whiting had been found guilty of misconduct.
125. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if the Air Force Inspector
General completed any investigation regarding your conduct, please
provide the results of this investigation.
Mr. Lohmeier. I do not have anything in writing indicating the
results of that investigation. After I honorably separated from Active
Duty in September 2021, I received a phone call from the Air Force IG
office who informed me that the investigation had closed, and that
neither I nor then-Lt Gen Stephen Whiting had been found guilty of
misconduct.
126. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, please provide a copy of the
results of the Command Directed Investigation (CDI) initiated by
Lieutenant General Stephen Whiting, USSF, to determine whether public
comments you had made constituted prohibited partisan political
activity.
Mr. Lohmeier. While [DC5]Lt Gen Whiting did inform me that he had
directed an investigation, I was never provided with the results and
presume this means that the allegations were appropriately
unsubstantiated.
nuclear modernization
127. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, if the Air Force plans to extend
Minuteman III to 2050, would the Air Force and lead contractor Northrop
Grumman Corp. benefit from additional time to better plan and manage
the Sentinel program?
Mr. Lohmeier. It is my understanding the Minuteman III will
continue to be sustained and operated by the Air Force until replaced
by Sentinel. The capabilities and deterrence value of Sentinel
capabilities are critical to national defense. If confirmed, I will
commit to working with the acquisition enterprise and industry to
successfully manage the Sentinel program.
128. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what is your understanding of
the value of an Integrated Master Schedule for managing large and
complex programs?
Mr. Lohmeier. I understand the value of an Integrated Master
Schedule (IMS) to be critical to verifying the attainability of
contract objectives, evaluating progress toward meeting program
objectives and integrating government/contractor program schedule
activities. I believe this type of comprehensive roadmap can help
improve communication, coordination, and control throughout a program's
life.
129. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, under what circumstances should
a complex program advance without an Integrated Master Schedule?
Mr. Lohmeier. I understand that advancing a complex program without
an Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) is generally a higher-risk
proposition and should be avoided whenever possible.
130. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, what is your understanding of
the biggest challenges confronting the Sentinel program?
Mr. Lohmeier. I understand there to be a variety of challenges
confronting the Sentinel programs, including talent acquisition, supply
chain deliveries, and construction complexity, to name a few. I know
that overcoming these challenges will require strong leadership,
effective management, and sustained commitment from the government,
industry, and the public. If confirmed, I look forward to getting fully
briefed on this program and helping to find solutions to the
challenges.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Tammy Duckworth
politicization of the military
131. Senator Duckworth. Mr. Lohmeier, you stated in your hearing
testimony that you engaged with Members of Congress about your
concerns, after your Inspector General (IG) complaint was found with no
merit but before you decided to publish your book and publicly speak
out. You committed to providing documentation of your correspondence
with Members of Congress. Can you please provide records of this
correspondence with dates?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes, as I stated in my hearing testimony, I attempted
to engage Members of Congress by letter about my concerns over the
politicization of the military workplace after I had discussed my
concerns with my chain of command and after my IG complaint had been
dismissed. I have attached that letter, dated May 14, 2021. The same
letter was addressed and sent to various members of both the Senate and
House of Representatives.
132. Senator Duckworth. Mr. Lohmeier, if confirmed, do you commit
not to retaliate against general officers or military servicemembers
for executing lawful policies enacted by a previous Administration?
Mr. Lohmeier. I commit to following the law.
inspector general investigation
133. Senator Duckworth. Mr. Lohmeier, as you promised in our call
on April 30, 2025, can you please provide documentation of your claim
that, after you separated, the Air Force cleared you of any accusations
or formal charges of engaging in prohibited partisan political activity
or partisan statements?
Mr. Lohmeier. I honorably separated from Active Duty on September
1, 2021. The honorable discharge status is indicated on my DD214. After
I separated from the Air Force, the Air Force IG office called to
inform me that they had closed their investigation, and the evidence
did not substantiate any allegations against me. I never received any
written notification afterward, but the Air Force may have additional
documentation.
unauthorized disclosures
134. Senator Duckworth. Mr. Lohmeier, if confirmed, do you commit
that your deliberations and decisions will only be communicated through
official, secure channels and any decisions properly documented for
both oversight and institutional memory?
Mr. Lohmeier. Yes.
______
[The nomination reference of Mr. Matthew L. Lohmeier
follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The biographical sketch of Mr. Matthew L. Lohmeier, which
was transmitted to the Committee at the time the nomination was
referred, follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The Committee on Armed Services requires all individuals
nominated from civilian life by the President to positions
requiring the advice and consent of the Senate to complete a
form that details the biographical, financial, and other
information of the nominee. The form executed by Mr. Matthew L.
Lohmeier in connection with his nomination follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The nominee responded to Parts B-F of the committee
questionnaire. The text of the questionnaire is set forth in
the Appendix to this volume. The nominee's answers to Parts B-F
are contained in the committee's executive files.]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The nomination of Mr. Matthew L. Lohmeier was reported to
the Senate by Chairman Wicker on May 13, 2025, with the
recommendation that the nomination be confirmed. The nomination
was confirmed by the Senate on July 24, 2025.]
______
[Prepared questions submitted to Mr. Justin P. Overbaugh by
Chairman Wicker prior to the hearing with answers supplied
follow:]
Questions and Responses
duties, qualifications, and relationships
Question. Section 137a of title 10, U.S. Code, establishes the
position of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and
Security (DUSD(I&S)) and provides that the DUSD ``shall be appointed
from among persons who have extensive experience in intelligence
matters.''
If confirmed as DUSD(I&S), what do you believe would be your most
critical duties and responsibilities?
Answer. The primary responsibility of the Deputy Under Secretary of
Defense for Intelligence and Security (DUSD(I&S)) is to support the
Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security (USD(I&S)) as
well as the Secretary of Defense by executing his intelligence and
security responsibilities and authorities, including the authorities
that are codified in Title 10 and Title 50 of the United States Code.
Conducting this responsibility in support of the warfighter and our
national defense will always be on the top of my mind. If confirmed, I
will also always want to balance the USD(I&S)'s responsibilities with
the protection of privacy and civil liberties, pursuant to section
137(c) of Title 10 United States Code and in accordance with Federal
law and the regulations and directives of the Department of Defense.
I understand that the responsibilities of the DUSD(I&S) by statute
and policy are contained in DOD Directive 5143.01. I would support the
USD(I&S) as the Principal Staff Assistant and advisor regarding
intelligence, counterintelligence, security, sensitive activities, and
other intelligence-related matters; exercising authority, direction,
and control on behalf of the Secretary of Defense over the Defense
Intelligence Agency (DIA), the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency
(NGA), the National Security Agency / Central Security Service (NSA /
CSS), the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), and the Defense
Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA); establishing policy and
priorities for, and providing oversight of, the defense intelligence
and security enterprises; exercising oversight of personnel policy to
ensure that intelligence organizations in the Department of Defense are
staffed, organized, trained, and equipped to support the missions of
the Department; ensuring that the DOD intelligence components that are
also elements of the intelligence community (IC) are responsive to the
Director of National Intelligence (DNI) in the execution of the DNI's
authorities; ensuring that the combatant commanders, the Joint Chiefs
of Staff, and the civilian leadership of the Department are provided
with appropriate intelligence support; ensuring that
counterintelligence activities in the Department are conducted and
managed efficiently and effectively; ensuring that certain sensitive
activities which the Department conducts or supports are conducted and
managed efficiently and effectively; overseeing the implementation of
assigned DOD security policies and programs to ensure efficiency and
effectiveness; and serving as the Program Executive for the Military
Intelligence Program (MIP).
Question. What is your understanding of the role of the DUSD(I&S)
as ``first assistant'' to the Under Secretary of Defense for
Intelligence and Security (USD(I&S))?
Answer. As the principal assistant to the Under Secretary, the
DUSD(I&S) assists the USD(I&S) in carrying out the responsibilities,
fulfill functions, manage relationships, and exercise authorities as
provided for in law and DOD Directive 5143.01, including the exercise
of authority, direction, and control on behalf of the Secretary of
Defense over the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the National
Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA), the National Security Agency/
Central Security Service (NSA/CSS), the National Reconnaissance Office
(NRO), and the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA).
In addition, the DUSD(I&S) assists the USD(I&S) in planning, policy,
and strategic oversight for all defense intelligence,
counterintelligence and security policy, plans, and programs. Last, the
DUSD(I&S) advises on and assists the Under Secretary with all
responsibilities in providing staff advice and assistance to the
Secretary of Defense. If confirmed, as a leader in the Department it is
an implied responsibility, when appropriate, beneficial, and lawful, to
collaboratively support the intelligence-related needs for the whole-
of-government mission to protect our Nation's security.
Question. What is your understanding of the differences between the
title 10 and title 50 duties of the USD(I&S)--duties that, in regard to
some matters, could be delegated to you if confirmed as the DUSD(I&S)?
Answer. My understanding is that the DUSD(I&S) supports the
USD(I&S) and Secretary of Defense in fulfilling all the Secretary's
statutory responsibilities in the areas of intelligence and security,
whether codified in Title 10 or Title 50 of the United States Code.
Although I am not aware of any specific portfolio assignments or
delegations at this time, the duties of the USD(I&S) are further
prescribed in DOD Directive (DoDD) 5143.01. This includes providing
overall direction and supervision for policy, program planning and
execution, and use of resources for DOD activities that are part of the
Military Intelligence Program and for personnel security, physical
security, industrial security, and the protection of classified
information and controlled unclassified information-related activities.
Of note, section 137(c) of title 10 also states that it shall be a top
priority of the USD(I&S) to protect privacy and civil liberties in
accordance with Federal law and the regulations and directives of DOD.
I also understand that the USD(I&S) supports the Secretary of
Defense in fulfilling the responsibilities in subsection 3038(a) of
Title 50, United States Code, in consultation with the Director of
National Intelligence, to ensure: (1) that the budgets of the
intelligence community (IC) elements within the Department of Defense
(DoD) are adequately funded to the overall DOD intelligence needs; (2)
the implementation of the policies and resource decisions of the
Director of National Intelligence by DOD Components within the National
Intelligence Program (NIP); (3) that DOD tactical intelligence
activities complement and are compatible with intelligence activities
funded by the NIP; (4) that the IC elements within DOD are responsive
and timely with respect to satisfying the needs of operational military
forces; (5) waste and unnecessary duplication among the DOD
intelligence activities are eliminated; and (6) that DOD intelligence
activities are conducted jointly where appropriate.
Question. What leadership and management experience do you possess
that you would apply to your service as DUSD(I&S), if confirmed?
Answer. If confirmed, it would be my privilege to put my nearly 26
years of experience in leadership and management in service as
DUSD(I&S). Most recently, I've served as the Chief Operations Officer
for Strategic Decision Solutions, a boutique strategy and risk
consulting firm serving midsize ($200mil to $1b) property and casualty
insurance companies. Prior to that, I served in the U.S. Army for over
25 years, retiring as a Colonel. I've successfully led and managed
organizations specializing in Infantry, Intelligence
Counterintelligence and Recruiting operations. As part of my duties,
I've managed relationships with U.S. community leaders, U.S. and
foreign intelligence services, and U.S. interagency and foreign
military partners.
Question. Please provide an example of a situation in which you led
and brought to conclusion a management improvement/change initiative in
a complex organization.
Answer. As Director of Intelligence for a Special Operations--Joint
Task Force at U.S. Special Operations Command, I led a change
initiative to establish full-spectrum intelligence support for a new
strategic organization tasked with global synchronization of sensitive,
national-level capabilities. As part of this effort, I successfully
convened seven international partners to collaborate on 148 global
operations, enhancing partner-nation interoperability and improving the
efficiency and efficacy of operations and intelligence sharing.
Additionally, I built a new decision support and analytical team that
connected our joint task force with 25 national defense, intelligence,
and academic organizations. This initiative culminated in the creation
of a comprehensive, global threat picture, which significantly
strengthened our ability to respond to emerging threats and made a
measurable impact on global security operations.
Question. What is your experience across the domain of intelligence
matters? Security matters?
Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to applying my over two
decades of intelligence and security related experience to the role of
DUSD(I&S). Mostly recently, I served as Director of Intelligence for a
Special Operations--Joint Task Force, establishing full-spectrum
intelligence support to a new U.S. Special Operations Command
organization charged with global synchronization of sensitive,
national-level capabilities. In this capacity I worked across the
Intelligence Community and Interagency along with Foreign Allies and
Partners to reorient some of the U.S.'s most exceptional resources
toward our most challenging threats. Prior to that role, I served in
various intelligence positions of increasing responsibility including
Human Intelligence Branch Chief at U.S. Special Operations Command, the
Commander of all U.S. Army Strategic Counterintelligence operations in
Europe and Africa, Counterintelligence Case Officer, Executive Officer
for the U.S. Army's only dedicated Counterintelligence unit charged
with supporting Special Operations Forces, Military Source Operations
Collector in eastern Afghanistan, the Senior Intelligence Officer for
2d Battalion, 1st Special Forces Group, and as a Reconnaissance Platoon
Leader in the 101st Airborne Division. Along the way, I earned two
graduate degrees (MS in Defense Analysis and MA in National Security
and Strategic Studies), co-authored scholarly articles on intelligence
and foreign policy, graduated from DIA's Advanced Foreign
Counterintelligence Operations Course, earned the U.S. Army
Counterintelligence Agent's Badge and Credentials and was recognized
with the National Counterintelligence Executive's 2014
Counterintelligence Operations Award.
Question. Are there are any actions you would take to enhance your
ability to perform the duties and exercise the powers of the DUSD(I&S)?
Answer. If confirmed, leveraging the experience and wisdom of the
career professionals within the DISE and throughout the Department will
be critical to my own and the organization's success. I believe in the
value of seeking knowledge in every direction and will do so if
confirmed. Furthermore, I would work to ensure an organization climate
that encourages the best ideas to flow freely through the organization.
From my understanding of the responsibilities of the OUSD(I&S) and
requirements in support of DOD, the broader IC, and the whole-of-
government, it is imperative to foster and facilitate a collaborative
environment to achieve mission success. If confirmed, I will personally
work to maintain strong relationships and seek new opportunities for
collaboration with stakeholders.
Question. If confirmed, specifically what would you do to ensure
that your tenure as DUSD(I&S) epitomizes the fundamental requirement
for civilian control of the Armed Forces embedded in the U.S.
Constitution and other laws?
Answer. As a proud Veteran, I am fully committed to upholding the
fundamental requirement in the U.S. Constitution and other laws for
civilian control of the Armed Forces, a key principle of American
governance and enabler for our success as a Nation. This includes
executing my responsibilities and duties established by law and policy
to the President, Secretary of Defense, and to the U.S. Congress, and
holding those who I manage and oversee accountable for the same.
Question. How do you view the relationship and division of
responsibilities between the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense
for Intelligence and Security (OUSD(I&S)) and the Office of the
Director of National Intelligence (ODNI)?
Answer. The partnership between OUSD(I&S) and Office of the
Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) is essential to the success of
the DISE. The OUSD(I&S) works closely with the ODNI to effectively
integrate intelligence in support of U.S. national security interests.
Through the effective partnership and integration between OUSD(I&S) and
ODNI, the Intelligence Community delivers coordinated intelligence to
policymakers and warfighters on crucial threats to our national
security. If confirmed, I will seek to continue to strengthen the
partnership between OUSD(I&S) and the ODNI to maximize effects and
return on investment of our combined efforts.
The USD(I&S) himself is dual-hatted as the Director of Defense
Intelligence at ODNI and there is a military officer who serves as the
DNI's Advisor on Military Affairs (DAMA) to ensure tight coordination
between the Department of Defense Intelligence Enterprise (DIE) and the
greater IC. The staffs must coordinate to effectively and efficiently
ensure quality intelligence is provided in support of our national
leadership and warfighters. I believe that USD(I&S) plays a critical
role and is effective in ensuring IC support to Warfighters.
Last, as a principal member of the Suitability and Security
Clearance Performance Accountability Council (PAC), the USD(I&S) works
with the DNI, who is the Security Executive Agent and a principal
member of the PAC.
Question. How do you view the relationship and division of
responsibilities between the OUSD(I&S) and the Office of the Under
Secretary of Defense for Policy (OUSD(P)), particularly as regards
policy and programs for information operations, including military
deception and operations security (OPSEC)?
Answer. My understanding is that the Under Secretary of Defense for
Policy (USD(P)) is the Principal Staff Assistant for oversight of
Information Operations (IO), and that the USD(I&S) is the Program
Management Lead for DOD deception activities and operations security.
In coordination with the USD(P), the USD(I&S) develops and oversees
implementation of DOD policy, programs, and guidance for military
deception and operations security; the coordination and deconfliction
of DOD IO and intelligence activities; and develops and oversees the
implementation of policy for intelligence support to IO. If confirmed,
I will prioritize ensuring the Department has all available tools to
effectively compete along the full competition continuum. A strong
partnership between OUSD(I&S) and OUSD(P) is critical in the
development and effectiveness of DOD activities to counter adversary
activities in the ``gray zone'', which will enable our ability to deter
adversaries short of armed conflict and re-establish deterrence.
Question. In your view, what would be the optimum relationship
between the OUSD(I&S) and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in
regard to providing operational intelligence, counterintelligence, and
security support to the warfighter?
Answer. I understand that the USD(I&S) is responsible for
supporting the Secretary of Defense in discharging his intelligence and
security responsibilities and authorities under Title 10 and Title 50
of the United States Code. This includes exercising authority,
direction, and control on behalf of the Secretary of Defense over
certain defense intelligence components of the Department of Defense
and working closely with the Joint Staff, Combatant Commands, Service
Components, and the ODNI to develop effective policy, plans, programs,
and priorities. The optimal relationship between OUSD(I&S) and the
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is mutual support and
consultation to ensure the defense intelligence enterprise (DIE)
provides the warfighters with the best intelligence possible, to
conduct their planning and operations and to provide the Secretary of
Defense with the best defense intelligence and military advice.
Question. What is your understanding of how the responsibilities
for the oversight of the activities and programs of special operations
forces are delineated between the OUSD(I&S) and the Assistant Secretary
of Defense for Special Operations and Low Intensity Conflict
(ASD(SOLIC))?
Answer. I understand that USD(I&S), the Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict (ASD(SO/
LIC)), and the DOD Senior Intelligence Oversight Official (SIOO) acting
together are the primary oversight officials for all U.S. Special
Operations Forces intelligence and intelligence-related activities and
programs. A strong partnership between OUSD(I&S), ASD(SO/LIC), and
their Deputies is critical in the development and effectiveness of many
DOD activities in the ``gray zone,'' which will enable DOD's ability to
deter adversaries short of armed conflict and reestablish deterrence.
If confirmed, we will work closely together with the SIOO, who I
understand provides independent oversight within the Department of
intelligence and intelligence-related activities. I will continue this
close partnership to ensure that the United States is best postured to
maximize effects. In doing so, I will ensure defense intelligence
activities adhere to appropriate coordination processes within the
Office of the Secretary of Defense.
Question. How do you view the relationship and division of
responsibilities between OUSD(I&S) and the Office of the Under
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition & Sustainment (OUSD(A&S)) in
regard to both unclassified and classified contract efforts?
Answer. I understand the relationship between OUSD(I&S) and the
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition & Sustainment
(OUSD(A&S)) is one of cooperation and collaboration. I am aware of
existing important efforts between both offices, to include an
examination of DOD oversight of classified contracting, getting the
National Background Investigation Services program back on track, and
partnering to protect the National Security Innovation Base and Defense
Industrial Base from adversary compromise. If confirmed, I look forward
to learning more about these efforts and making my own assessment of
their progress.
Also, if confirmed, a priority of mine will be to better enable
intelligence to inform Department investments, effectively matching
capabilities with threats, along the entire acquisition life cycle. I
will work closely with the USD(A&S) to best integrate intelligence
efforts to effectively support decisionmakers amidst a rapidly evolving
technological and threat environment.
Question. How do you view the relationship and division of
responsibilities between the OUSD(I&S) and the DOD Chief Information
Officer, particularly with respect to the cybersecurity mission;
developing interoperability requirements applicable to information
systems architectures for processing intelligence and
counterintelligence information; and the certification of intelligence
information systems?
Answer. I view the relationship between the OUSD(I&S) and the
Department of Defense Chief Information Officer (DoD CIO) as one
predicated on collaboration and partnership to align, secure, and
modernize information security policies and DOD's information system
architectures to support our warfighters. I understand that the DOD CIO
advises the Secretary of Defense on information technology, including
National Security Systems and defense business systems, cybersecurity,
and develops DOD strategy and policy for all DOD information
technology. Along with the newly established position for the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Cyber Policy, the partnership between
OUSD(I&S) and DOD CIO is imperative for continuing cybersecurity
efforts, such as implementing Zero Trust on all three DOD network
fabrics to mitigate nefarious actors including potential insider
threats.
If confirmed, I will work with the DOD CIO to advance the
department's mission by ensuring an integrated, intelligence, and
counterintelligence informed management of IT and network security that
addresses the evolving cybersecurity threat.
Question. How do you view the relationship between the OUSD(I&S)
and the heads of the Intelligence Components of the Military
Departments? What factors would you recommend that the USD(I&S)
consider and weigh in providing input to the Secretaries of the
Military Departments on the duty performance of the heads of their
respective Intelligence Components?
Answer. My understanding is that the OUSD(I&S) staff works closely
with the heads of the intelligence and counterintelligence components
of the Military Departments. The USD(I&S) then provides input to the
Secretaries of the Military Departments on the performance of the
senior intelligence officer within each Military Department.
The USD(I&S) is the Principal Staff Assistant to the Secretary of
Defense with authority delegated from the Secretary to establish policy
for DOD intelligence, counterintelligence, security, sensitive
activities, and other intelligence-related matters. If confirmed as the
DUSD(I&S), I will assist the Directors for Defense Intelligence within
OUSD(I&S) with their specific programmatic responsibilities and support
the USD(I&S) in carrying out his assigned responsibilities and
exercising the authorities delegated to the USD(I&S) by the Secretary
of Defense.
The Secretaries of the Military Departments exercise authority,
direction, and control over all components within their respective
Departments. The heads of the intelligence and counterintelligence
components within the Military Departments are under the authority,
direction, and control of the Secretary of the Military Department, and
subject to the policy oversight of the USD(I&S).
I understand that DOD Directive 5143.01 outlines the
responsibilities and functions, relationships, and authorities of the
USD(I&S). In accordance with this Directive, OUSD(I&S) assists the
USD(I&S) to develop and provide policy guidance, resource advocacy, and
oversight for the integration of Reserve Component intelligence
elements, and ensures the Department effectively employs and resources
Reserve Component intelligence elements to best support the National
Defense Strategy. The programmatic role of OUSD(I&S) is the same with
respect to the Active and Reserve Components of the Military Services.
Like the Active Components, the Reserve Components' intelligence
elements are under the authority, direction, and control of the
Secretary of the relevant Military Department in which they are
located, and subject to the policy oversight of the OUSD(I&S).
Question. What is your understanding of the DUSD(I&S)'s
responsibility and authority for the management and oversight of
Military Intelligence Program (MIP) and National Intelligence Program
(NIP) funding? How do the processes employed by the OUSD(I&S) in the
execution of these responsibilities differ from the Planning,
Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE) process applicable to all
other DOD organizations and funding?
Answer. My understanding is that USD(I&S) executes the Secretary's
statutory responsibilities regarding the budgets of the DOD components
that comprise the Intelligence Community (IC), specifically ensuring
the budgets of DOD IC elements are adequate to satisfy the overall
intelligence needs of the Department. Further, as the MIP Executive
Agent, the USD(I&S) is also responsible for the management and
oversight of the Military Intelligence Program (MIP). The USD(I&S)
executes the functions for the NIP of the Department, as delegated by
the Secretary of Defense, and as the Director of Defense Intelligence
for ODNI, has visibility into the NIP through participation in the ODNI
PPBE decision forums. Additionally, the DNI and the USD(I&S) then
jointly issue intelligence programming guidance to closely synchronize
NIP and MIP-funded programs to ensure the Department's priorities are
communicated to the IC. If confirmed, I will support the USD(I&S) in
his partnership with the ODNI in ensuring DOD intelligence requirements
are effectively supported within the NIP budget.
With respect to the DOD PPBE process, it is my understanding that
the USD(I&S) is a full participant in the Department's PPBE process and
that military intelligence requirements compete with the other DOD
requirements.
Question. If confirmed, specifically what actions would you take to
develop and sustain an open, transparent, and productive relationship
between the Senate Armed Services Committee and the OUSD(I&S) and the
Defense Agencies under the authority, direction, and control of the
USD(I&S)?
Answer. I believe that collaborative congressional oversight
provides an invaluable perspective on DOD activities that informs
better decisions within both branches of government, ultimately making
DOD more effective in achieving our common purpose of strengthening our
national defense. If confirmed, I intend to maintain a routine,
continuous, and transparent dialog with the defense oversight
committees to discuss the Department's activities that are subject to
their oversight, including defense intelligence, counterintelligence,
security, sensitive activities, and other intelligence-related
activities. I am committed to maintaining open lines of communication
with Congress to ensure accurate and consistent information is shared
from the OUSD(I&S) and the defense agencies under USD(I&S) authority.
Through this approach, I will seek to facilitate effective oversight
and build mutual trust between DOD and Congress, enabling DOD
constructive conversations and collaboration on statutory authorities,
resource allocation, and oversight.
Question. If confirmed, will you commit to ensure that this
Committee is provided with the notifications required under law, and
that any such notification is accurate, complete, and timely?
Answer. I am committed to keeping Congress fully and currently
informed for all activities that fall under the USD(I&S)'s
responsibility under DOD Directive 5143.01, including fulfilling the
notification requirements in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2723. If
confirmed, I will examine how the OUSD(I&S) supports the USD(I&S) with
respect to this responsibility and pursue improvements, as needed, to
ensure such notifications are accurate, complete, and timely.
conflicts of interest
Question. Federal ethics laws, to include 18 U.S.C. Sec. 208,
prohibit government employees from participating in matters where they,
or certain family members or organizations with which they have certain
relationships, have a financial interest.
Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to disclose any
potential conflicts of interest, including investments, business ties,
family relationships, or other connections that could be perceived as
influencing your decisionmaking?
Answer. I agree to comply with all conflicts of interest disclosure
requirements set forth in the Ethics in Government Act and implementing
regulations.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, that
if a conflict of interest arises, you will recuse yourself from
participating in any decisions regarding that specific matter?
Answer. I agree to comply with all recusal requirements under 18
U.S.C. Sec. 208 and implementing regulations.
Question. Do you commit, without qualification, if confirmed, to
decisionmaking on the merits and exclusively in the public interest,
without regard to private gain or personal benefit?
Answer. I commit to deciding matters on the merits based on the
public interest, without regard to any private gain or personal benefit
major challenges and priorities
Question. What do you consider to be the most significant
challenges you would face if confirmed as the DUSD(I&S)?
Answer. If confirmed, the most significant challenge I anticipate
as DUSD(I&S) will be how to ensure that the DISE is most effectively
supporting the Secretary of Defense's priorities of restoring a warrior
ethos, rebuilding our military, and reestablishing deterrence in
support of our national defense in a rapidly changing environment.
Effective management of the DISE is essential, and we must align
efforts to maximize effects downrange and the return on our investment.
This includes ensuring we have the right technology and organizational
structure to enable our personnel--some of America's best--to increase
their impact in today's operational environment, and to position the
Enterprise for the rapidly changing landscape of the future. If
confirmed, I would ensure the Enterprise has the culture, business best
practices, and processes necessary to be agile, while remaining laser
focused on the mission. Adapting the DISE at the speed of relevance
will be difficult, but essential. From my perspective, technology
advancements in ubiquitous sensing, space control, and unmanned systems
at scale are examples of the challenges to which we must adapt.
If confirmed, I will endeavor to better enable intelligence to
inform Department investments, effectively matching capabilities with
threats. With program costs incredibly high--and the cost of
misallocation on the modern battlefield even higher--the premium on
intelligence effectively informing the entire acquisition life cycle is
at an all-time high. I believe the speed of the technology will require
increased focus earlier in the development cycle, requiring an
increased focus on scientific & technical intelligence.
We must ensure the Department has all the tools required to most
effectively compete along the full continuum of conflict. Our
adversaries are increasingly conducting malign activity below a
threshold that has traditionally triggered a military response.
Enhancing DOD Irregular Warfare capabilities will allow us to provide
leaders with risk-informed options to better compete short of armed
conflict and re-establish deterrence. Similarly, I believe offensive
cyber capabilities and an increased focus on Defense human intelligence
are areas for opportunity. Finally, offensive counterintelligence
efforts are essential in disrupting our adversaries. These options may
often carry additional risk; however, the DISE will strive to provide
risk-informed options to the Secretary that support his and the
President's national security objectives.
expanding roles and responsibilities
Question. In 2003, Congress established the position of Under
Secretary of Defense for Intelligence with the intent to improve
coordination of the Department of Defense's intelligence and security
efforts in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11,
2001. The roles and responsibilities of the Under Secretary have
expanded significantly since the creation of the position, particularly
in the areas of security and law enforcement.
What is your understanding of the evolution and growth of the roles
and responsibilities of the OUSD(I&S) since its establishment?
Answer. I understand that the evolution of the roles and
responsibilities of the OUSD(I&S) since its establishment in 2003 have
been strategic and responsive to the evolution and growth of
requirements to support the Secretary of Defense in executing
intelligence and security responsibilities and authorities under Title
10 and Title 50 of the United States Code. The growth is largely
attributed to the evolution of important security functions and
programs that enable the Department to more effectively compete across
the spectrum of conflict, to include implementation and oversight of
Trusted Workforce 2.0 and the designation of the Under Secretary as the
Principal Staff Assistant for Law Enforcement. I see these and others
as necessary to support the Secretary in the successful implementation
of the Interim National Defense Strategic Guidance.
Question. If confirmed, how do you intend to balance the
significant and varied responsibilities of the OUSD(I&S)?
Answer. I understand that the USD(I&S) is the Principal Staff
Assistant and advisor to the Secretary of Defense with authority
delegated from the Secretary of Defense to establish policy and provide
oversight for DOD intelligence, counterintelligence, security,
sensitive activities, other intelligence-related matters, and law
enforcement. If confirmed as the DUSD(I&S), I will support the USD(I&S)
in fulfilling all responsibilities in a manner that supports the
Interim National Defense Strategic Guidance. I will identify and
leverage the extraordinary expertise and talent across OUSD(I&S) and
Defense Intelligence and Security Enterprise to successfully accomplish
this objective.
supervision, and oversight of the defense intelligence and security
enterprise
Question. The USD(I&S) is vested with responsibility for the
overall direction and supervision of the Defense Intelligence and
Security Enterprise in the execution of intelligence,
counterintelligence, security, sensitive activities, and other
intelligence-related matters across DOD. Subject to USD(I&S) oversight,
responsibility for executing policies and programs in these domains
vests primarily in the Military Departments and Services, elements of
the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and the Defense Agencies.
What is your understanding of the role of the OUSD(I&S) in
coordinating the activities of the Defense Intelligence and Security
Enterprise?
Answer. I see intelligence and security as mutually reinforcing
mission areas. The Department must understand the intentions,
capabilities, and activities of strategic competitors and adversaries.
Similarly, the security apparatus must safeguard our personnel,
information, capabilities, and infrastructure against adversaries. I
understand that OUSD(I&S) works across the Department with the Military
Services and defense agencies to identify requirements and capabilities
to meet DOD priorities. They work closely with the ODNI to ensure the
national intelligence priorities take all Departmental requirements
into account. These efforts ensure Enterprise alignment with all
national and Department-level strategies, guidance, direction, and
relevant priorities. The USD(I&S) also executes the Military
Intelligence Program (MIP) and participates in the ODNI specified
National Intelligence Program (NIP) process to ensure resources are
aligned against DOD priorities.
national defense strategy
Question. What is your assessment of the current strategic
environment, including your assessment of the critical and enduring
threats to the national security of the United States and its allies
and partners?
Answer. The United States faces one of the most dangerous strategic
environments in our Nation's history, characterized by the
vulnerability of the U.S. Homeland from years of unsecured borders,
increasingly capable air and missile threats, and others; China's
unprecedented military buildup and its intent to seize control of the
Indo-Pacific; and a range of other persistent threats to the United
States and its Allies and partners, including Russia, Iran, North
Korea, and terrorists. In addition, growing cooperation between Russia,
China, Iran, and North Korea must be monitored to safeguard our
interests.
Question. If confirmed, how would you prioritize the efforts of the
Defense Intelligence and Security Enterprise relative to the critical
and enduring threats identified above?
Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure the DISE prioritizes
intelligence support and effective security posture, aligned to
strategic priorities and the evolving threat environment. I will work
across DOD and the Intelligence Community to prioritize capabilities
that address critical and enduring threats while identifying and
considering capability gaps and shortfalls throughout the Planning,
Programming, Budgeting, and Execution (PPBE) process. In addition, I
will partner closely with the DNI to align the MIP and NIP for greatest
effect downrange and return on investment.
Question. In your view, what role(s) should the Defense
Intelligence and Security Enterprise play in the implementation of the
National Defense Strategy?
Answer. The DISE plays a vital role in implementation of an NDS
promulgated by the Secretary of Defense. In support of the objectives
of the next NDS, the DISE must support both warfighters and
decisionmakers; provide decision advantage; reestablish deterrence; and
safeguard personnel, information, operations, resources, technologies,
and facilities against a wide range of threats and challenges. At the
same time, the DISE must also maintain its ability to provide strategic
warning globally.
Question. How would you assess the current readiness and
capabilities of the Defense Intelligence and Security Enterprise to
execute the NDS?
Answer. I believe the DISE is well-postured to support DOD's
execution of the Department's strategic priorities. If confirmed, I
will conduct my own assessment of the Enterprise's readiness and seek
new and innovative ways to improve its ability to execute the Interim
NDS and the next NDS promulgated by the Secretary of Defense.
strengthening alliances and attracting new partners
Question. Mutually beneficial alliances and partnerships are
crucial to U.S. success in competition and conflict against a great
power.
Question. If confirmed as DUSD(I&S), what would be your priorities
to strengthen and synchronize existing intelligence and
counterintelligence relationships with foreign governments and
international organizations as well as to foster new relationships?
Answer. My time in Army intelligence leading collection operations
and supporting Special Operations Forces taught me the immense value of
close partnerships with foreign partners. Strong international
relationships and intelligence sharing during my military service
resulting in increased mission success and decreased risk to force,
while shedding light on the fidelity of strategy, formed the foundation
for my appreciation of their value at the national level. U.S.
intelligence sharing relationships in many cases provide outstanding
return on investment as we each leverage our respective placement,
access, and capabilities while economizing resources. Allies and
partners can be force multipliers that enable DOD to effectively
execute the Secretary's next National Defense Strategy if they approach
the relationship as true partners, willing to contribute as able and
appropriate, not simply be recipients of our intelligence and
information. If confirmed, I commit to strengthening defense
intelligence and counterintelligence relationships with Allies and
partners, including ensuring we have the intelligence sharing
relationships needed to execute the next National Security and National
Defense Strategies. I also commit to working with the USD(P) and ODNI
to ensure synchronization of existing U.S. partnerships and the
appropriate prioritization of outreach to new partners.
Question. If confirmed, what factors should be considered in
rendering decisions on the disclosure and release of intelligence to
foreign governments and international organizations, including in
support of combatant commanders' expressed desire for better
intelligence and intelligence sharing to counter foreign malign
activities?
Answer. I understand that the National Disclosure Policy (NDP) sets
forth the factors that must be considered prior to the disclosure of
classified military information, including military intelligence, to
appropriate foreign partners. I also understand that the USD(I&S) is
responsible for issuing policy for the sharing of military
intelligence. If confirmed, I will support the release of military
intelligence and coordinate with the DNI to enable the release of
national intelligence to Allies and partners to support combatant
command requirements in accordance with the NDP when in support of the
National Security and National Defense Strategies and aligned with
United States policy.
oversight of sensitive activities
Question. The Department of Defense defines sensitive activities as
``operations, actions, activities, or programs that, if compromised,
could have enduring adverse effects on U.S. foreign policy, DOD
activities, or military operations or cause significant embarrassment
to the U.S., its allies, or the DOD.''
What is your understanding of the role of the USD(I&S) in providing
oversight of DOD sensitive activities?
Answer. The USD(I&S) is the Principal Staff Assistant and advisor
to the Secretary of Defense and Deputy Secretary of Defense regarding
intelligence, counterintelligence, law enforcement, security, sensitive
activities, tradecraft, and other intelligence-related matters. The
USD(I&S) establishes policy and provides oversight and direction for
the coordination, assessment, reporting, and conduct of DOD
intelligence and intelligence-related sensitive activities, the Defense
Cover Program, special communications, technical collection support to
intelligence activities, defense sensitive support, and the clandestine
use of technology.
If confirmed, I would work closely with relevant defense and
interagency stakeholders to ensure DOD sensitive activities are
conducted consistent with law and DOD policy.
Question. If confirmed, what factors would you consider in
assessing risks associated with proposed DOD sensitive activities?
Answer. I believe that if DOD is to provide the Secretary of
Defense with all necessary options to effectively compete and deter
adversaries short of armed conflict, DOD must be prepared to take
greater risks in the conduct of the sensitive activities necessary to
reestablish deterrence. However, I strongly believe that these risks
must be informed risks. OUSD(I&S) should play a critical role in
strengthening the oversight of DOD sensitive activities, providing the
Secretary and other decisionmakers with a deeper understanding of the
intelligence, the threat environment, potential impact assessments, and
other critical information available to DOD's interagency and
international partners. If confirmed, I will work with the team to look
at these and other factors and determine the extent to which our
current risk assessment methodologies are adequate for the current
environment to provide the most valuable risk informed decisions.
Question. Do you believe the USD(I&S) has a responsibility to keep
the congressional defense committees fully and currently informed of
DOD sensitive activities? If so, how would you seek to fulfill that
responsibility?
Answer. Yes, I believe that the USD(I&S) has this responsibility
under law, policy, and precedent. If confirmed as the Deputy USD(I&S),
I intend to support the USD(I&S) to maintain a routine, continuous, and
transparent dialog with the congressional defense committees on all
Defense Intelligence and Security Enterprise activities, to include DOD
sensitive activities. I believe that collaborative congressional
oversight provides an invaluable perspective on DOD activities that
informs better decisions within both branches of government, ultimately
making DOD more effective in achieving our common purpose of
strengthening national defense.
defense department and the intelligence community collaboration
Question. Since September 11, 2001, collaboration--both analytical
and operational--between the Department of Defense and the Intelligence
Community has grown increasingly close. Seamless collaboration is vital
to effective and rapid responses to non-traditional threats and
bringing together the strengths of the full spectrum of defense and
intelligence capabilities can generate more effective solutions to
complex problems. However, absent effective management and oversight,
such collaboration risks blurring distinct agency missions,
authorities, and funding, as well as creating redundant lines of
effort.
In your view, are there aspects of the current relationship between
the Department and the Intelligence Community that should be re-
examined or modified?
Answer. I am aware that the OUSD(I&S) works closely with both ODNI
and the Central Intelligence Agency to ensure that the Intelligence
Community (IC) is able to deliver both national and military
intelligence support to policymakers and warfighters. OUSD(I&S) also
enables the rest of the DOD and the IC to coordinate and deconflict to
ensure the most effective execution of intelligence and sensitive
activities. If confirmed, I will seek to strengthen the relationship
between OUSD(I&S) and the IC so that we can continue to work together
to enhance IC capabilities and enable DOD operations.
economic competition
Question. Adversarial economic competition is increasingly an issue
that DOD needs to factor into its planning process as it intersects
with military and national security challenges. Adversaries like China
are using economic competition as a gray zone tactic to out-maneuver
the U.S. by operating in the interstitial spaces between traditional
agencies ``lanes in the road'' and stove-piped authorities.
Increasingly, geographic combatant commands are having to consider in
their planning process and theater security cooperation plans how to
combat adversarial economic competition techniques.
How is DOD postured from an intelligence perspective to understand
and analyze the intersection of economic and national security to
better prepare DOD to contribute to economic competition?
Answer. Economic security is national security--the U.S. military
is only as powerful as the underlying strength of the U.S. industrial
base. While the President and the Secretary have made clear the
expectation that the Department aligns its resources to support the
warfighter, DOD can play a significant role in coordinated operations
across the economic and military domains to support national security
objectives. I understand that DOD has pockets of excellence that
contribute heavily to this mission space, but there is certainly room--
and a requirement--for increasing depth in relevant areas of expertise
to ensure DOD is optimally postured to leverage commercial, financial,
economic, and military tools to reinforce the United States' military
advantage. This includes an increased focus on China's efforts to gain
an economic advantage against the United States and its Allies and
partners as well as how their specific economic tradecraft is affecting
our competition in order to inform leadership decisions.
Question. What expertise and capabilities does DOD have to support
the collection and analytic needs for economic competition?
Answer. While I have not been fully briefed on current
capabilities, I am generally aware that the Defense Intelligence
Enterprise has expertise in several relevant fields, ranging from
economics and political science to engineering and biosciences. If
confirmed, I will seek to identify gaps in our expertise and
capabilities in order to optimize the Enterprise against the economic
competition problem set.
Question. How will you prioritize intelligence support for the
geographic and functional combatant commands, as well as senior
leadership in the Department, with regards to adversarial economic
competition needs?
Answer. Given the complex and multidisciplinary nature of economic
competition, I believe that it is critical that support provided to the
combatant commands aligns with the vision and priorities of DOD senior
leadership. The President and the Secretary have made clear the
expectation that the Department aligns its resources to support the
warfighter. We must ensure we have modern structures that appropriately
align to the threat, using obsolete organizational structures and
outmoded approaches to address new types of threats will not work. If
confirmed, I will work to support the USD(I&S) and work with the
Defense Intelligence Enterprise (DIE), the Intelligence Community, and
the broader U.S. Government to ensure the DIE's support is
appropriately distributed with--and aligned between--these key
customers to maximize effects.
joint requirements oversight council (jroc) and the joint capabilities
integration and development systems (jcids)
Question. Per section 181 of title 10, U.S. Code, the JROC is
vested with the responsibility to assess joint military capabilities;
establish and approve joint performance requirements that ensure
interoperability between military capabilities; and identify new joint
military capabilities based on advances in technology and concepts of
operation. The JCIDS process was established to address overlap and
duplication in Military Services' programs by providing the information
the JROC needs to identify the capabilities and associated operational
performance requirements needed by the joint warfighter.
What is your understanding of the role of the JROC and JCIDS in
identifying and establishing joint warfighter capability requirements
in the domains of military intelligence, counterintelligence, and
security?
Answer. I understand that military intelligence,
counterintelligence, and security requirements generated from DOD
Components, including the combatant commands, are accounted for among
the other Joint Capability Areas in the Joint Requirements Oversight
Council's (JROC) subordinate Functional Capabilities Boards (FCB).
These FCBs process ``bottom up'' deliberate and urgent requirements and
provide ``top down'' portfolio reviews that evaluate specific
enterprise capability areas. The Joint Capabilities Integration and
Development Systems (JCIDS) process is also informed by a yearly JROC-
led Capability Gap Assessment that validates and prioritizes Combatant
Command capability gaps expressed in their Integrated Priority Lists.
The USD(I&S), as a statutory advisor to the JROC and its
subordinate boards, provides advice that supports JCIDS throughout all
stages of requirements generation and validation processes and plays a
central role in bridging DOD and IC requirements by directly
facilitating the common gatekeeping function between the Joint JCIDS
and the Intelligence Community Capability Requirements Process.
Question. What is your understanding of the role of the defense
intelligence enterprise to provide support and insight in the process
of informing requirements for the broader acquisition system,
especially related to understanding threat systems and illuminating
supply chain issues? Are there sufficient people and resources to
support acquisition intelligence for the Department?
Answer. I have real concerns about the ability of the existing DOD
acquisition integration structure with the intelligence enterprise to
effectively match the speed of the technology cycle, the increasing
scope of acquisitions challenges, and the criticality of the defense
supply chain resiliency in the face of adversary threats. The DISE is a
vital component of the acquisition process, providing intelligence
throughout the requirements development and acquisition lifecycle on
current and future adversary capabilities and threats to DOD supply
chains. Ensuring that intelligence is incorporated throughout the
requirements development and acquisition lifecycle is necessary to
deliver effective, affordable, and resilient capabilities that are
matched to the threat environment and free from adversary compromise.
If confirmed, I will make it a priority to improve the incorporation of
accurate intelligence into the full acquisition lifecycle, to include
more robust integration at the earlier stages of the process, to better
inform DOD investments.
Question. What is your understanding of the role of the Office of
the Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security
(OUSD(I&S)) in identifying and establishing requirements for rapid or
urgent operational needs, or other acquisition capabilities (like
middle tier acquisitions) not tied to major acquisition programs?
Answer. I understand that, as part of statutory responsibilities to
support JCIDS urgent and emergent operational needs processes, the
USD(I&S) assists in validating requirements from an intelligence
perspective, and further supports solution analysis by identifying
emerging technologies and capabilities in the Defense Intelligence
Enterprise or National Intelligence Community. When necessary, the
USD(I&S) may also facilitate Military or National Intelligence Program
funding to accelerate the fielding of a necessary and promising
intelligence capability. The analysis performed by USD(I&S) for urgent
needs is not limited to major acquisition programs, but may also
include science, technology, research, and development capabilities
that are of sufficient Technical Readiness Level to be eligible for
consideration as a solution to a requirement. From my current
perspective, I am concerned that intelligence inputs into the DOD
acquisition process are inordinately focused on major acquisitions
versus rapid acquisitions, and even then, intelligence inputs often
arrive too late in the cycle to fully inform the first and most
critical decisions on which programs to develop and purchase. If DOD
leaders are to successfully make these hard choices, OUSD(I&S) must
improve how the DISE delivers accurate and relevant intelligence to
inform DOD's earliest acquisitions decisions, as well as the entire
program lifecycle. If confirmed, I intend to leverage all DOD
authorities available to accelerate these processes to act at the speed
of operational need.
intelligence support to the warfighter
Question. If confirmed, how would you balance the need for the
combat support Defense intelligence agencies to provide intelligence
support to the warfighter with the need to provide intelligence support
to policymakers?
Answer. Balancing support to the warfighter with intelligence
support to policymakers is one of the OUSD(I&S)'s primary
responsibilities. In today's environment of global and regional
threats, most issues are relevant to both warfighting commands and
policymakers. If confirmed, where there remain tactical and operational
differences, I would work to ensure the DISE continues to satisfy
requirements for operationally relevant intelligence that directly
enable warfighter success, and I would work collaboratively across DOD
and with interagency partners to inform policy and military
decisionmaking by our national leaders.
Question. In your view, what opportunities exist across the
Intelligence Community to improve intelligence support to the
warfighter? If confirmed, what would you do to leverage these
opportunities?
Answer. My experience in uniform underpins my belief in the
importance of and the continued opportunity to improve collaboration
across the intelligence community to better support the warfighter.
If confirmed, I would engage early and often with the combatant
commanders to improve my understanding of their needs, and I would
frequently engage leaders within the national intelligence community to
obtain support to meet those warfighter needs. I am particularly
interested in applying greater attention to faster, more agile, and
adaptive processing, exploitation, and dissemination of intelligence
data to better support the warfighter and others that engage our
adversaries at the tactical edge--especially as DOD warfighters
increasingly rely on resilient and survivable sensors further removed
from the battlefield to inform their tactical decisions.
Question. If confirmed, what steps would you take to ensure that
the geographic combatant commands are adequately assessing and
prioritizing their intelligence needs?
Answer. I understand that OUSD(I&S) conducts multiple engagements
with the combatant commands to include regular meetings with all
combatant command J2s on a variety of issues in order to maintain a
current understanding of regional risks and intelligence priorities. If
confirmed, I will promptly establish my own relationships with the
Combatant Commanders and ensure that they are able to prioritize and
receive the intelligence support they require.
Question. In your view, what are the shortfalls, if any, in
providing the functional combatant commands and combat support agencies
adequate intelligence support, and ensuring that their intelligence
needs are prioritized?
Answer. As I am not yet in the position, I do not have a completely
informed perspective on this matter. If confirmed, I commit to
supporting the Secretary's priorities and evaluating intelligence needs
of the Combatant Commands, Combat Support Agencies, Defense Agencies,
and Services. I would also strengthen relationships with the Joint
Staff to assess capability gaps, prioritize needs, and recommend
strategic alignment of MIP funding against the highest intelligence
needs of the warfighter in a manner that maximizes our return on our
investments. Last, I would support the USD(I&S) to work with the DNI to
closely synchronize NIP and MIP investments to ensure synergy in
maximizing effects for the warfighter.
Question. In your view, how are intelligence operations carried out
by special operations forces different from those carried out by the
Intelligence Community?
Answer. I understand that Special Operations Forces (SOF)
intelligence operations are focused on DOD requirements and priorities.
These priorities may differ from those of the IC in that they are
sometimes more tactical, focused on support to military operations or
preparation of military operations. This intelligence enables a
commander to make decisions that reduces risk to force and can create
opportunities for further collection and exploitation. SOF missions
require accurate, detailed, and timely intelligence that only
integrated, multi-disciplinary collection and analysis can provide. It
is essential that SOF intelligence operations are conducted pursuant to
applicable law and policy, and subject to the requisite intelligence
oversight rules, consistent with all DOD intelligence activities.
innovative technologies
Question. What role do you see for AI in supporting national and
economic security?
Answer. I believe national and economic security have a reciprocal
relationship. The role of AI for one will generally apply to the other.
AI has the potential to enhance the speed and efficiency of how the
DISE provides support to national security. In an environment of
expanding data sources and a limited workforce, AI could assist in
triaging and transforming the tasks requiring human attention. We must
carefully consider the biases and vulnerabilities created through the
introduction of AI, although it is without question that AI integration
is necessary and has the potential to provide improved accuracy and
precision in our support.
Question. If confirmed, what priority would you assign to ensuring
that the Defense intelligence enterprise invests in AI applications, as
well as training and business process reengineering to ensure effective
use of such applications by the workforce?
Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that AI is considered in the
modernization of capabilities, infrastructure, processes, and
tradecraft within the DISE. We should default to its investment where
it can improve our speed, accuracy, and efficiency.
We can learn from AI investment across the government to understand
where to leverage its potential in shaping our operating environment
and driving future advantages.
Question. What role do you envision for AI in bringing greater
efficiencies, timeliness, and accuracy to intelligence collection,
analysis, dissemination, and military decisionmaking?
Answer. I cannot speak highly enough of our intelligence
professionals. Their expertise and time are invaluable. I believe that
AI can assist in prioritizing the collection that receives their
attention and collate that information in a manner that expediates
their analysis. AI can also be used to improve the efficiency in
disseminating more relevant, accurate, and actionable intelligence into
the hands of the warfighter at greater speed and volume, thereby
enabling better and faster military decisionmaking. AI can also be used
to create new ways of generating and responding to intelligence
requirements.
Question. Are there other technology areas that you view as
promising as they relate to the intelligence and security functions of
OUSD(I&S)?
Answer. I believe that to accomplish the Secretary's objective of
rebuilding our military capabilities, we must be flexible and
aggressive in our approach to innovation and adopting commercial
solutions. Critical to success will be closer integration between DOD
and the commercial sector in order to identify and pilot new
capabilities that can be used to maintain an advantage against our
adversaries at the speed of relevance.
Additionally, I believe there are a number of promising areas that,
if confirmed, I will work with OUSD(I&S) components and DISE to support
regaining decision advantage in today's contested environment. Among
these areas are: the exploitation of, and our defense against,
exquisite intelligence collection technologies, such as ubiquitous
sensing and space ISR; expanding virtual domain operations that disrupt
adversary intelligence; the use of advanced computing and software to
improve the efficiency of intelligence collection management; and
survivable cloud compute and data transport to the tactical edge.
Question. In your view, does DOD have sufficient numbers and
expertise in the intelligence community to monitor and analyze
technological advances in industry, academia and our adversaries
research establishments that will impact DOD missions and national
security?
Answer. As I am not in the position, I am unable to provide a
comprehensive assessment to answer this question. However, from my
outside perspective, I am concerned that the DOD may lack sufficient
quantity and specialization of Science and Technology Intelligence
(S&TI) personnel that are necessary to remain competitive with our
adversaries. The sheer volume of information in open-source research
alone presents challenges for the capability and capacity of human
analysts, even when paired with AI tools. Additionally, many emerging
technologies require highly specialized expertise that are either in
short supply or may not be currently available within the U.S.
Government and might require changes to DOD authorities to fully
address. Even with improvements, DOD will increasingly be reliant on
outside expertise for cutting edge technology, particularly in niche
fields such as quantum computing, biotechnology, and advanced
materials. I do not believe that we can rely on traditional
organizational structures and approaches to solve these new challenges.
OUSD(I&S) creatively uses existing programs such as the
Intergovernmental Personnel Act and the Applied Research Laboratory for
Intelligence & Security to close talent gaps. DOD must also effectively
leverage commercial sector innovation to help us close these gaps. If
confirmed, I will support the USD(I&S) efforts with the USD(R&E), the
ODNI, the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU), the private sector, and others
to develop options to ensure that the DISE has access to the expertise
needed to stay ahead of adversary technological advancements.
Question. In your view, what areas of emerging technology should we
be prioritizing collection and analysis to better prepare DOD for
future conflicts?
Answer. Although I am not yet in the position and have not had the
opportunity to be fully briefed at the classified levels, if confirmed,
I will conduct a full assessment on which emerging technologies we must
improve collection and analysis against. Beyond traditional focuses for
collection and analysis, there are emergent technologies that are
advancing adversary capabilities. We must understand how adversaries
seek to develop and deploy those technologies, along with identifying
opportunities for how we can deny adversary employment.
Some specific areas that we should be prioritizing include quantum,
space-based technologies and biotechnology.
counterintelligence, law enforcement, and security
Question. What is your assessment of current and anticipated
counterintelligence threats to DOD? Which threats do you assess to be
the most concerning and why?
Answer. As I am not yet in the position and briefed on classified
information, if confirmed, I will seek to understand the
counterintelligence threat environment at the classified level in order
to develop informed recommendations to counter threats to our
intelligence advantage.
I am aware that the advent of ubiquitous sensing, artificial
intelligence-powered exploitation of data, and analytics (also referred
to as data analytics), may make it increasingly challenging for U.S.
intelligence to operate with the same effectiveness and agility against
our adversaries without the appropriate modernization of our efforts.
Additionally, as DOD increasingly relies on space-based capabilities
for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance support to
warfighters, protecting U.S. space superiority from foreign denial and
deception grows more essential.
Question. What is your understanding of the roles and
responsibilities of the OUSD(I&S) to provide strategic direction and
oversight of implementation of counterintelligence policy, programs,
guidance, and training to ensure they are responsive to validated DOD
and national counterintelligence priorities? What changes, if any, in
these roles and responsibilities would you recommend, if confirmed?
Answer. I understand the USD(I&S) has broad responsibility for
oversight of DOD counterintelligence (CI). Further, although I do not
yet have access to classified information, I understand that the
Department is implementing its DOD CI Strategy, ``Confronting Threats
to America's Military Advantage, 2021-2031,'' and has recently
completed a year-long, end-to-end review to identify CI capability
requirements, gaps, and solutions to implement that strategy.
I also understand the USD(I&S) along with the Director of the
Defense Intelligence Agency is a standing member of the National CI and
Security Center's National CI Policy Board. In addition, DOD
participates with the FBI in the National CI Task Force and local CI
Task Forces under a formal memorandum of understanding. Through this
and other forums the USD(I&S) provides policy, oversight, advocacy,
guidance and direction to DOD CI activities conducted, oftentimes, in
cooperation or in partnership with other Departments and Agencies
across the U.S. Government.
One of my major priorities, if confirmed, is to support the
USD(I&S) to assist the Secretary in reestablishing deterrence by
presenting him with risk informed options to impose costs on our
adversaries short of armed conflict. Among these options is a greater
focus on counterintelligence, and in particular, offensive
counterintelligence, to disrupt foreign intelligence services before
they can act with malign intent against the United States.
personnel security and insider threat
Question. The OUSD(I&S) is accountable for managing and overseeing
DOD's insider threat, personnel security, security clearance process,
and the National Industrial Security programs. DOD has experienced
devastating attacks from insider threats--attacks that have led to the
death and injury of DOD personnel, as well as to the loss of highly
classified information critical to national security. Recent delays
have exacerbated backlogs in processing security clearances and
reinvestigations for DOD personnel.
Most of these very challenging new and enhanced requirements have
been assigned to the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency
(DCSA). What is your current assessment of the ability of DCSA to
transform itself to meet these objectives?
Answer. I understand that after President Trump transferred the
background investigation and security clearance function to DCSA in
2019, DCSA vetting services have proved essential to national-level
efforts to modernize personnel vetting and uniformly execute the
National Industrial Security Program. DCSA services establish the
foundation for execution of various subsequent security requirements
and procedures which enable the essential concept of security in-depth.
Additionally, in accordance with Section 847 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, DCSA has been charged to
prepare to conduct assessments of Foreign Ownership, Control, and
Influence (FOCI) not only for cleared defense contractors, but also all
DOD contracts over $5 million--an effort that, if confirmed, I intend
to assess closely to determine how best to support the FOCI mission in
an effort to protect the Defense Industrial Base from compromise.
Ultimately, to effectively and efficiently serve the DOD and other
Federal agencies, I believe that DCSA requires cutting-edge technology,
adaptable processes, the capacity to operate at scale, and--perhaps
most significantly--the best talent available with the skills needed to
pursue these objectives.
Although I do not yet have enough information to make a full
assessment currently, the criticality of these efforts and the State of
our capabilities relative to the timing of these mandates is
concerning. If confirmed, I look forward to working with DCSA to fully
assess the State of play.
Question. There has been a backlog in processing security
clearances that has been growing since 2023, after many years of steady
progress in improving the security clearance process timelines. What is
your understanding of the current issues causing the backlog and the
status of efforts within DCSA to reduce that backlog?
Answer. I am dismayed at the continuing challenges to delivering
timely security clearances, and if confirmed, it would be a top
priority to avoid further delay in meeting the requirements of Trusted
Workforce 2.0. Our national security depends on recruiting and
retaining highly qualified individuals serving in critical positions
across the Federal Government and industry, and delays in the security
clearance process hinders our ability to fill these roles at the speed
of mission requirements. People are our most important asset, but an
inefficient and lengthy background investigation and security clearance
process prevents the DOD from attracting and competing for top-tier
talent. Every day a scientist, engineer, or analyst waits on their
clearance to begin Federal work is 1 day closer to taking a job
elsewhere--or never even applying to the U.S. Government at all.
If confirmed, I will fully engage with DCSA to understand the
factors contributing to timeliness concerns and will hold them
accountable for their performance. I commit to modernizing and
accelerating the clearance process through rigorous oversight and
dedication to business transformation, advanced technology, and data-
driven solutions.
Question. Specifically, if confirmed, how would you ensure that
DCSA is highly responsive to the needs of the USD(A&S) for vetting DOD
contractors in responsibility determinations?
Answer. I understand that DCSA provides vetting of contractor
personnel and companies for eligibility to access classified
information in accordance with regulatory requirements for the National
Industrial Security Program. This vetting assesses alignment of
eligibility decisions with national security interests. This is one
piece of a security apparatus that must work in concert with and at the
speed of the acquisitions decisionmaking process to enable
uncompromised delivery of supplies and technologies to properly equip
our warfighters.
If confirmed, I will support the USD(I&S)'s efforts to prioritize
collaboration with OUSD(A&S) to optimize security in acquisitions,
including vetting people and companies within a certain timeframe and
under conditions that allow the Department to acquire critical
supplies, services, and technologies at the speed of mission
requirements.
Question. What is your understanding of the status of development,
approval, and implementation of the Trusted Workforce 2.0 initiative?
Answer. I recognize that Trusted Workforce (TW) 2.0, originally
launched in 2018 under President Trump, is a national-level reform
effort aimed at improving overall efficacy of vetting for clearances
and suitability. While I understand that TW 2.0 may have demonstrated
some relative progress at times over the last few years, there clearly
remains unacceptable challenges to full implementation of its
objective.
If confirmed, I will support the USD(I&S)'s efforts to collaborate
with our ODNI, Office of Personnel Management (OPM), and Office of
Management and Budget colleagues to evaluate and take appropriate
action to ensure that DOD fulfills its TW 2.0 responsibilities.
Furthermore, I commit to keeping DOD's interagency and private industry
partners fully and regularly informed of DCSA's progress in
implementing TW 2.0, and identifying to them--as well as the Congress--
any indications of additional delays or cost overruns in meeting the
performance and timeliness standards set for the vetting enterprise.
Specifically, I will work to ensure Department leaders know the impact
of failing to meet these standards, so efforts can be appropriately
prioritized in support of Department objectives.
Question. What is your understanding of the status of development,
approval, and implementation of continuous vetting initiative?
Answer. It is my understanding that continuous vetting (CV),
including the adjudication of CV information, is a key element of
Trusted Workforce 2.0. As DOD further implements CV, I believe its
implementation must prioritize advanced technology, capacity, and cost-
effectiveness. Without an effective and timely CV architecture, DOD
will be unable to optimize its workforce in a secure manner,
jeopardizing mission success.
If confirmed, I will push OUSD(I&S) and DCSA to incorporate modern
technology, maximize efficiency, and continuously improve the ability
to identify and assess risk to our Nation's trusted workforce.
Specifically, I will work to ensure Department leaders know the impact
of failing to meet these standards set for the vetting enterprise, so
efforts can be appropriately prioritized in support of Department
objectives.
Question. What is your understanding of the remaining challenges in
achieving reciprocity of clearances and access to classified
information across government components and their contractors?
Answer. I am aware of concerns about reciprocity between Federal
components, particularly with IC agencies. My understanding is that
reciprocity between DOD components has been significantly improved, but
the delays in reciprocity that remain are generally related to
differences between IC agencies in their individual enhanced
eligibility requirements for access to especially sensitive
information, such as polygraph requirements.
If confirmed, I will ensure DOD personnel vetting policies and
processes are aligned to Trusted Workforce 2.0 initiatives and tracked
through a performance management system to ensure effective and
efficient transfer of trust and the mobility of the Federal workforce,
as well as our contractors and others in private industry who are
granted clearances.
Question. In your view, how should DCSA posture the Department to
deter, detect, and mitigate insider threats before they harm national
security?
Answer. Over the course of my military service, I learned time and
again the importance of empowering leadership and accountability at all
mission levels. I understand that USD(I&S) is responsible for policy
and oversight of the Department's Insider Threat program, ensuring DOD
components have the necessary guidance, resources, and capabilities to
empower leaders at all levels to manage insider risk to readiness,
resources, and national security information. I understand that DCSA's
role in the Insider Threat program is to be a data and system provider,
enabling information sharing and decentralized program implementation
so DOD commanders at all levels effectively manage their own risks.
If confirmed, I will work with DCSA, the Military Departments, and
other DOD components to ensure component and subordinate level insider
threat program interoperability with enterprise data and systems.
Question. How would you characterize the threat posed by foreign
nations to the integrity of the National Security Innovation Base?
Which threats do you assess as most concerning, and why?
Answer. The threat posed by foreign nations to the integrity of the
National Security Innovation Base is persistent and significant. While
I am not currently briefed on classified information, from open-source
reporting I appreciate that the National Security Innovation Base is
being exploited in sustained attempts to erode U.S. technology
superiority critical to maintaining a military advantage over
adversaries and the economic well-being of U.S. industry. Threat actors
increasingly seek to weaponize the open and collaborative nature of the
strong partnerships and relationships DOD has cultivated with U.S.
academic institutions. Additionally, foreign threats don't just include
outright theft of information through espionage and other illicit
means, but also rely on more subtle approaches such as foreign
acquisition of critical nodes within the U.S. supply chain.
If confirmed, I look forward to further strengthening DOD efforts
to protect the National Security Innovation Base--to include an
emphasis on robust intelligence support to Foreign Ownership, Control,
and Influence mitigation and support to the Committee on Foreign
Investment in the United States--to thwart our adversaries while
continuing to support the vital and enabling aspects of innovation. In
addition to FOCI and the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United
States (CFIUS) efforts, I believe a key component of this effort will
be not only enhancing our defensive posture here at home but taking
action to impose costs on adversaries and reestablish deterrence.
Question. How would you propose to improve the support provided by
the DCSA, the DOD counterintelligence organizations, and the national
Intelligence Community to better protect the National Security
Innovation Base, and enhance the Department's innovation strategy,
especially with respect to technology companies that are non-
traditional DOD contractors?
Answer. DCSA plays a vital role in safeguarding national security
by conducting background investigations and granting security
clearances for DOD personnel and contractors. DCSA also oversees the
National Industrial Security Program (NISP), which protects classified
information within the Defense Industrial Base.
Although the core security principles of the NISP remain valid for
all companies and contractors, as I understand from open-source
reporting, the NISP's administrative requirements may lack the agility
needed to facilitate effective acquisition decisions and ensure supply
chain integrity in today's landscape, especially for classified
programs. Furthermore, I am concerned that these regulations do not
adequately address the needs of the National Security Innovation Base,
a significant portion of which operates outside of the traditional NISP
framework. It is these non-traditional DOD contractors that
increasingly drive national security innovation, presenting DOD with
the greatest opportunities for leap-ahead technologies, but meanwhile
posing unique vulnerabilities to our adversaries.
Question. In your view, is DCSA postured to better leverage
artificial intelligence and other automation tools to improve due
diligence vetting, as well as security clearance processes and
suitability determinations?
Answer. I recognize the immense potential of artificial
intelligence and machine learning to revolutionize personnel vetting
and due diligence. Through automating routine tasks and analyzing vast
datasets, I believe we could significantly improve the speed and
accuracy of these vetting processes. If confirmed, I will prioritize
development and adoption of these technologies across the DOD, working
closely with DCSA to ensure responsible and effective implementation
and return on investment.
Question. According to the ``Fork in the Road'' memo from the
Office of Personnel Management, ``Employees will be subject to enhanced
standards of suitability and conduct as we move forward,'' but no
further guidance has been issued on what that means. What is your
current understanding of the current definition for ``suitability''
being used by DOD, the process for those suitability determinations,
and how that might change?
Answer. I understand USD Personnel and Readiness (USD(P&R)) is the
Department's lead for suitability based on guidance issued by OPM. If
confirmed, I look forward to working with the USD(P&R) to ensure the
appropriate intelligence and security inputs are incorporated into
their guidance.
collection & special programs
Question. In light of the rapidly evolving nature of the national
security environment, to include significant advances by adversarial
nations in the development and fielding of capabilities that could
challenge DOD tradecraft, technologies, methodologies, and processes,
what do you see as the most pressing challenges to DOD's ability to
conduct technical and human intelligence collection activities?
Answer. Adversary investment in advanced technologies such as
artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and encrypted
communications, as well as the dispersion of sophisticated capabilities
across the globe, have complicated the information environment and
reduced our national security advantage. Additionally, the emergence of
ubiquitous sensing and the increasing volume of commercially available
data on individuals and their activity pose novel counterintelligence
challenges to DOD human intelligence collection activities, operational
security, force protection, and many other areas of potential
vulnerability.
Meanwhile, our own foundational vulnerabilities such as fragmented
infrastructure, limited interoperability, and outdated network
architectures amplify the threat from these advanced capabilities.
Therefore, we must invest in innovation to stay ahead of these advanced
technologies while building a secure, efficient foundation to move our
information from sensors to decisionmakers securely and faster than our
adversaries.
If confirmed, I will work to smartly allocate and realign resources
to close the seams that adversaries exploit, raising the barrier and
cost of conducting intelligence against the U.S., and ensuring our
intelligence enterprise can securely navigate an era defined by
relentless digital exposure and ubiquitous technical surveillance. This
will include DISE efforts to address the reality of global ubiquitous
sensing, the proliferation of networked, correlated, and automated
systems, and the algorithms that can exploit gathered information.
Question. If confirmed, how do you intend to approach these
challenges to ensure that the DOD intelligence enterprise is postured
to operate in an increasingly contested security and intelligence
environment?
Answer. DOD operates within an increasingly contested security and
intelligence environment. Embracing new technology and investing in
innovative solutions is vital to the Department's ability to grasp
collection opportunities in the physical and digital domains.
If confirmed, I will lead the continuous review of processes and
policies to support warfighters and decisionmakers in this changing
environment. This may require changes in how DOD personnel train and
use tradecraft, technologies, and methodologies, as well as process
adjustments for collection analysis. Aggressive efforts to ensure DOD
is leveraging the best commercial technologies will remain essential,
as will our ability to rapidly field technologies where required. As we
adapt our efforts, we must ensure the DOD's intelligence collection
activities are lawful and conducted in accordance with the United
States Constitution.
Alignment across mission and technology needs, modernization of
planning doctrine in this new landscape, and reducing barrier of entry
for DOD elements and personnel to access best-in-class capabilities in
a resource efficient manner is essential in 2025 and beyond.
information operations
Question. What are your views on the roles, responsibilities, and
preparedness of the Defense Intelligence and Security Enterprise to
conduct operations in the information environment, as well as deter and
defense against such operations by adversaries?
Answer. I believe that for DOD to compete effectively in the
information environment, the Defense Intelligence and Security
Enterprise must inform activities that shape the perceptions of
specific foreign audiences to gain or maintain a competitive advantage.
Our efforts to deter and defend against adversary information
operations should be prioritized with appropriate resources and must
include more robust coordination and collaboration across the
Department, including with the USD(P) as the Secretary of Defense's
Principal Information Operations Advisor, as well as the interagency.
Question. In your view, how can the Defense Intelligence and
Security Enterprise better support the requirements of the combatant
commanders for intelligence to enable their information operations?
Answer. I believe that the DISE should enhance its ability to
support Combatant Commanders by focusing on three key areas:
understanding adversary goals, enabling maneuver in the information
environment, and identifying proxies and influence networks. First, the
DISE must improve its intelligence collection and analysis to fully
understand adversary goals in the information space--what they seek to
achieve, how they measure success, and where vulnerabilities exist.
Second, intelligence must be aligned with warfighter requirements to
facilitate maneuver in the information environment, ensuring that
commanders can shape narratives, counter adversary information
operations, and integrate influence activities into broader operational
planning to support American objectives Finally, the DISE should
increase its focus on tracking adversary use of proxies and influence
mechanisms--whether state-sponsored media, cyber actors, or third-party
enablers--to provide a clearer picture of the information battlespace.
If confirmed, I look forward to assessing and improving the
Enterprise's support to information operations in these areas.
imperative for independent intelligence analysis
Question. If confirmed, specifically what would you do to ensure
that DOD intelligence analysts, including those seconded to offices
that are not part of the defense intelligence structure, are
independent and free of pressure from influence from their chain of
command to reach a certain conclusion, including a conclusion that fits
a particular policy preference?
Answer. I am deeply committed to ensuring that all defense
intelligence assessments remain unbiased, objective, and free from
political interference. An absolute focus on the mission and support of
the warfighter demands it. The credibility of intelligence
assessments--and the willingness of our leaders to accept and act on
those assessments--is predicated on apolitical, non-partisan analytical
judgments. We cannot support the warfighter or policymaker without the
best thinking from all of our people in support of our national
security.
If confirmed, I will support the USD(I&S) efforts to work with the
DIE to ensure that all DOD intelligence analysts adhere to Intelligence
Community analytic standards promulgated in Intelligence Community
Directive 203, which mandates that all-source intelligence analysis
must be objective and independent of political considerations.
the defense intelligence workforce
Question. The USD(I&S) exercises policy oversight of the Defense
Civilian Intelligence Personnel System (DCIPS) to ensure that defense
intelligence, counterintelligence, and security components are
structured; manned; trained--including joint intelligence training,
certification, education, and professional development; and equipped to
execute their missions.
In your view, is the DOD civilian intelligence workforce properly
sized with the appropriate capabilities, in your view? Please explain
your answer.
Answer. As I am not yet in the position, I have not yet had an
opportunity to comprehensively assess the size or capabilities of the
DISE workforce. I am aware that the Secretary has directed reductions
within the civilian defense workforce to more effectively align with
the Administration's national security priorities, and I fully support
this critical effort. If confirmed, I will immediately review the work
that has been done to date across the DISE workforce and provide
recommendations for how to most effectively meet the requirements of
the DISE in support of national security.
space
Question. If confirmed, what would be your approach to enhancing
the interface and synchronization of space-based capabilities resident
in the Intelligence Community with military space organizations?
Answer. If confirmed, I will support the USD(I&S)'s work with the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Space Policy, the United States
Space Force, the ODNI, and defense and intelligence agencies to ensure
roles, responsibilities, and requirements amongst the various
stakeholder organizations are aligned and mutually support IC and
military space-based intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance (ISR)
needs. I would also ensure that DOD and IC ISR space architectures
remain integrated to maximize ISR support to the Joint Force to achieve
our national security objectives.
Question. How would you recommend deconflicting tasking
requirements in the space warfighting domain across DOD with tasking
requirements from Intelligence Community customers?
Answer. If confirmed, I would first work to understand the gaps and
concerns with existing tasking processes and procedures from the Joint
Staff, Combatant Command, and Service perspectives. I will then work
alongside the Joint Staff and ODNI to support the development of new
processes, tools, and concepts of employment to assure Combatant
Commanders and warfighters access to the space-based intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance necessary to support military
operational requirements. New architectures must be responsive to the
warfighter.
Question. The Space Force has been assigned the mission of space-
based ISR. To ensure the timely presentation of forces and effects to
the combatant commander by the Space Force, Congress enacted into law
section 1684 of National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024
(P.L. 118-31), further amended by section 1654 of the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (P.L. 118-366) which stated
that:
``The Secretary of the Air Force shall be responsible for
presenting space-based ground and airborne moving target indication
systems to the combatant commands to accomplish missions assigned to
such commands under the Unified Command Plan that--(1) are primarily or
fully funded by the Department of Defense; and (2) provide near real-
time, direct support to satisfy the operational requirements of such
commands.''
If confirmed, will you adhere to this provision of law?
Answer. Yes, if confirmed, I would ensure that OUSD(I&S) and the
Defense Intelligence Enterprise partner with the leads of the MTI
Working Group established by the fiscal year 2024 NDAA to identify the
most cost-effective delivery mechanisms to improve lethality.
unidentified anomalous phenomena (uap)
Question. What is your understanding of the current congressional
concerns regarding transparency and reporting on UAP issues with
Congress?
Answer. I am aware of the tremendous public and congressional
interest in understanding both historical and contemporary UAP
observations. If confirmed, I am committed to enabling the Department
of Defense, the Intelligence Community, and National Archives and
Records Administration to declassify and share information related to
UAP with the American public to the greatest extent possible. It is
imperative that we also continue to protect sensitive information
regarding sources and methods, to ensure that gaps potentially revealed
by declassification of information to the public--and therefore to our
adversaries--is a risk-informed decision. When UAP information is
unable to be safely and responsibly declassified, I am committed to
providing all such information, at all levels of classification, to the
appropriate congressional committees of jurisdiction.
Question. What do you see as the intelligence communities' level of
effort and focus on the UAP challenge?
Answer. I understand the Department enjoys strong support from the
IC and the whole of the DISE for its UAP mission. In line with statute,
AARO reports to both DOD and the ODNI and regularly convenes a group of
IC partners to share information and expertise. IC partners routinely
support AARO in the analysis and resolution of UAP reports. If
confirmed, I will ensure this strong partnership is sustained.
Question. The All-Domain Anomalous Resolution Office, or AARO, was
established to be the central clearinghouse for reporting and analysis
of UAP incidents.
Do you believe AARO is adequately staffed and resourced to carry
out its mission? What areas do you believe AARO should be focusing on?
Answer. Yes. I understand that AARO is adequately staffed and
resourced to meet its mission. I believe that AARO should focus on
fully leveraging partnerships and capabilities across the USG to close
gaps in domain awareness and minimize technological and intelligence
surprise. If confirmed, I will ensure AARO has the support it needs to
succeed, and that its efforts--and that of the DISE--are complementary
and synchronized with other DOD efforts to address Unmanned Vehicles in
an effective manner.
Question. How will you improve the integration of intelligence
community technical collection assets, such as signals intelligence and
measurement and signatures intelligence systems, into UAP reporting?
Answer. I understand that DOD enjoys strong support from the IC in
this regard. AARO convenes multiple UAP Communities of Interest that
engage IC partners to draw on their expertise, resources, and
capabilities. If confirmed, I will ensure continued DOD collaboration
with IC partners to expand and improve technical collection for UAP
detected in air, sea, or space.
sexual harassment
Question. If confirmed, what actions would you take were you to
receive or otherwise become aware of a complaint of sexual harassment
or discrimination from an employee of the OUSD(I&S)?
Answer. Every member of the DISE workforce is entitled to work in
an environment free of harassment or discrimination of any type. If
confirmed, I will ensure that leaders across the DISE are acting to
ensure that our workplace is free of harmful sexual or other harassment
or discrimination and will take immediate action to correct and hold
accountable those responsible for actions counter to law and policy.
detainee treatment
Question. Do you support the standards for detainee treatment
specified in the revised Army Field Manual on Interrogations, FM 2-
22.3, issued in September 2006, and in DOD Directive 2310.01E, The
Department of Defense Detainee Program, dated August 19, 2014?
Answer. Yes, I support the standards for detainee treatment
specified in Army Field Manual 2-22.3, Human Intelligence Collector
Operations and DOD Directive 2310.01E, Department of Defense Detainee
Program.
Question. Section 2441 of title 18, U.S. Code, defines grave
breaches of common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, including
torture and cruel and inhuman treatment.
In your view, does section 2441 define these terms in a way that
provides U.S. detainees in the custody of other nations, as well as
foreign detainees in U.S. custody appropriate protections from abusive
treatment?
Answer. Yes.
whistleblower protection
Question. Section 1034 of title 10, U.S. Code, prohibits taking or
threatening to take an unfavorable personnel action against a member of
the armed forces in retaliation for making a protected communication.
Section 2302 of title 5, U.S. Code, provides similar protections to
Federal civilian employees. By definition, protected communications
include communications to certain individuals and organizations outside
of the chain of command, including the Congress.
If confirmed, what actions would you take to ensure that military
and civilian members of the Defense Intelligence and Security
Enterprise who report fraud, waste, and abuse, or gross mismanagement--
including in classified programs--to appropriate authorities within or
outside the chain of command--are protected from reprisal and
retaliation, including from the very highest levels of DOD and the
broader Intelligence Community?
Answer. If confirmed, I commit to ensuring protections are afforded
to DISE employees who report fraud, waste, and abuse, or gross
mismanagement, in a manner consistent with law, regulation, and policy.
Additionally, I will ensure that personnel who pursue retaliatory
actions upon protected personnel are addressed appropriately, as
established by law, regulation, and policy.
Question. If confirmed, what role would you play in ensuring
consistency in the application and interpretation of whistleblower
protections across the Defense Intelligence and Security Enterprise?
Answer. If confirmed, I commit to ensuring DOD policy implementing
such protections is applied consistently and uniformly in accordance
with law.
congressional oversight
Question. In order to exercise legislative and oversight
responsibilities, it is important that this Committee, its
subcommittees, and other appropriate committees of Congress receive
timely testimony, briefings, reports, records--including documents and
electronic communications, and other information from the executive
branch.
Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, and on request,
to appear and testify before this Committee, its subcommittees, and
other appropriate committees of Congress? Please answer with a simple
yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
provide this committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate committees
of Congress, and their respective staffs such witnesses and briefers,
briefings, reports, records--including documents and electronic
communications, and other information, as may be requested of you, and
to do so in a timely manner? Please answer with a simple yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
consult with this committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate
committees of Congress, and their respective staffs, regarding your
basis for any delay or denial in providing testimony, briefings,
reports, records--including documents and electronic communications,
and other information requested of you? Please answer with a simple yes
or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
keep this committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate committees of
Congress, and their respective staffs apprised of new information that
materially impacts the accuracy of testimony, briefings, reports,
records--including documents and electronic communications, and other
information you or your organization previously provided? Please answer
with a simple yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, and on
request, to provide this Committee and its subcommittees with records
and other information within their oversight jurisdiction, even absent
a formal Committee request? Please answer with a simple yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
respond timely to letters to, and/or inquiries and other requests of
you or your organization from individual Senators who are members of
this committee? Please answer with a simple yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
ensure that you and other members of your organization protect from
retaliation any military member, Federal employee, or contractor
employee who testifies before, or communicates with this committee, its
subcommittees, and any other appropriate committee of Congress? Please
answer with a simple yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
______
[Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]
Questions Submitted by Senator Roger F. Wicker
resourcing intelligence capabilities
1. Senator Wicker. Mr. Overbaugh, I note in your opening statement,
you stated: ``I believe that we do not have the resources to cover all
threats simultaneously, therefore we must be deliberate and discerning
about the capabilities we pursue . . . '' Do you agree that we face the
most complex and dangerous security environment since World War II?
Mr. Overbaugh. I agree that we face a very complex, dynamic, and
constantly changing security environment. Under President Trump's
leadership, the Department is focused on achieving Peace through
Strength and will continue to enhance, advance, and invest in
capabilities to defend against the emerging threats facing our Nation
and against U.S. interests abroad. If confirmed, I will support the
efforts of the Secretary of Defense and the Under Secretary of Defense
for Intelligence and Security to ensure that defense and national
intelligence resources and capabilities are aligned to defend against
these emerging threats and security challenges.
2. Senator Wicker. Mr. Overbaugh, do you agree that we should be
growing our intelligence capabilities to deal with the growing threats
our Nation faces instead of reducing our footprint in key theaters like
Europe and the Middle East?
Mr. Overbaugh. I agree it is necessary to enhance our intelligence
capabilities in line with the President's and Department of Defense
priorities to enable the achievement of Peace through Strength, defend
the homeland, and deter emerging threats facing our Nation. If
confirmed, I will support the Secretary of Defense and Under Secretary
of Defense for Intelligence and Security in ensuring the alignment of
defense and national intelligence resources to address these emerging
security challenges.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Dan Sullivan
8(a) contracts
3. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Overbaugh, the Small Business Act (SBA)
8(a) program, created by Congress, provides a contract vehicle through
which sole source and set aside contracts can be awarded to small
businesses owned by Alaska Native corporations, Community Development
Corporations, Indian tribes, and Native Hawaiian organizations. These
corporations are tied to political relationships, not racial
classifications. They also are some of our most efficient contractors,
earning stellar Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System
(CPARS) marks. Last many of these small businesses employ veterans at
rates far exceeding the national average, allowing our Nation's finest
to continue to serve after they take off the uniform. Will you commit
to me to work to preserve and strengthen 8(a) contracting for the
Department of the Defense?
Mr. Overbaugh. Mr. Overbaugh--I fully support merit-based efforts
to increase U.S. companies' participation in the marketplace,
particularly in enriching our Defense Industrial Base. I do not support
any efforts that award public moneys based on the immutable
characteristics of the applicants. I appreciate the unique value that
Alaska Native corporations, Community Development Corporations, Indian
tribes, and Native Hawaiian organizations bring to the DOD through the
8(a) program. If confirmed, I commit to working with you and others in
Congress to preserve and strengthen 8(a) contracting, ensuring that
such contracts meet stringent security requirements while leveraging
their proven efficiency.
4. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Overbaugh, I recently toured an SBA 8(a)
contracting operation and saw firsthand the value 8(a) brings to the
Federal customer in terms of cost and efficiency while delivering
mission-critical solutions that increase our national security and
warfighter readiness. 8(a) contracts represent the best ``bang for the
buck'' for taxpayers, giving contracting officers additional
flexibility while also maximizing efficiency by reducing red tape. Do
you see the value in increased efficiency in flexibility brought from
initiatives such as the 8(a) program?
Mr. Overbaugh. Mr. Overbaugh--I understand that the 8(a) program
offers valuable flexibility and efficiency in contracting, delivering
cost-effective, mission-critical solutions that bolster national
security and warfighter readiness. If confirmed, I will work to ensure
OUSD(I&S) supports initiatives like the 8(a) program as long as they
continue to show benefit to the Warfighter and American Taxpayer.
5. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Overbaugh, rapid response capabilities are
essential to enable our warfighters to win on the battlefield. At the
same time, our defense contractors must rapidly respond to the needs of
our military to make the U.S. Military more lethal. Flexible and
efficient contracting through the SBA 8(a) program is one trusted way
to do this. Please explain how you will ensure that proven, dependable,
and cost-effective 8(a) programs remain in place and supported by the
Department of Defense.
Mr. Overbaugh. Mr. Overbaugh--I recognize that rapid response
capabilities are critical for warfighters, and the 8(a) program offers
a valuable avenue for achieving this through flexible, secure, and
efficient contracting.
protecting the u.s. industrial base
6. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Overbaugh, the United States defense
industrial base has always been a major target for foreign espionage--
especially by major adversaries like China and Russia. One concerning
trend the last few years is the very real threat of sabotage of
industrial base assets by foreign agents. We saw attempts attributed to
Russia to sabotage critical defense industrial base infrastructure in
NATO [North Atlantic Treaty Organization] countries since 2022. Germany
and the United Kingdom for instance both saw fires and explosions break
out at ammunition and missile facilities linked to the War in Ukraine.
We saw an assassination plot against the Chief Executive Officer (CEO)
of Rheinmetall, a major German arms supplier, and fires set by
explosive devices that went off at DHL logistics hubs in Germany,
England, and Poland bound for aircraft. If confirmed, will you commit
to doing an assessment of the security of the U.S. defense industrial
base against the types of plots I just described and report back to
Congress as soon as possible about ways we could better protect these
critical nodes?
Mr. Overbaugh. The increasing threat of foreign espionage and
sabotage, particularly from adversaries like China and Russia, demands
our urgent and coordinated attention. Concerning incidents in Europe,
such as those targeting ammunition and logistics facilities, underscore
the vulnerabilities within our defense industrial base and a shift
toward more aggressive tactics. If confirmed, I commit to a thorough
review of our security posture throughout the U.S. defense industrial
base, prioritizing protection against espionage and sabotage. I will
work closely with DOD leadership and Congress to ensure we have the
necessary resources, policies, and partnerships to safeguard this
critical asset, maintaining our national security and competitive edge.
collaboration with israel
7. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Overbaugh, for more than 4 decades, Iran
has served as the primary source of instability and chaos in the Middle
East. Hamas would not have been able to carry out the attacks of
October 7 without Iran's support. In Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and
beyond, Iran has, and continues to, work against American interests.
Iran today could produce weapons-grade uranium for one nuclear weapon
in just a week and multiple bombs in under a month. Iranian petroleum
exports remain at or near levels not seen in more than 6 years,
providing funding for their terrorist activity. Do you agree Iran must
be prevented from obtaining a nuclear weapon?
Mr. Overbaugh. Mr. Overbaugh: The President said that Iran must be
stopped from getting a nuclear weapon due to its destabilizing role in
the Middle East, funding of proxies, and rapid uranium enrichment
capacity. The United States should smartly leverage all aspects of
National power to counter Iran's stalling and prevent its
nuclearization.
8. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Overbaugh, in your view, what more should
the United States be doing to stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear
weapon?
Mr. Overbaugh. Mr. Overbaugh: The United States could leverage
multilateral sanctions, cyber operations, and regional alliances to
pressure Iran, while signaling military readiness and engaging in tough
diplomacy to prevent nuclear weapon development. Direct military action
should only be used as a last resort and only when clear we can
reasonably expect to achieve our limited military objectives. To
counter Iran's stalling tactics in ongoing nuclear talks, the United
States similarly could consider tightening sanctions and the escalation
of cyber operations thus bolstering regional deterrence in coordination
with allies to pressure Tehran into a verifiable deal before the 2025
sanctions deadline.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Jack Reed
allies and partners
9. Senator Reed. Mr. Overbaugh, our network of allies and partners
remains our greatest asymmetric advantage in strategic competition with
China, Russia, and others. Do you agree that robust intelligence
sharing with allies and partners is critical for our national security?
Mr. Overbaugh. I agree that robust intelligence sharing
relationships with allies and partners contributes to our national
security. Through these relationships, we are able to share the burdens
of intelligence and security activities undertaken against global
actors that negatively impact our national security, and we are able to
inform and influence foreign policymakers' decision calculus as they
determine what is best for their countries.
10. Senator Reed. Mr. Overbaugh, do you believe that in order to
maintain robust intelligence sharing that our foreign partners must
have trust that we will protect the information they share with us?
Mr. Overbaugh. Trust is the cornerstone for developing and
maintaining robust intelligence sharing with our foreign partners. Our
allies and partners must trust us, and we must trust them when it comes
to information and having that trust is based on durable relationships.
11. Senator Reed. Mr. Overbaugh, when there are public reports that
senior U.S. officials have been sharing classified and sensitive
information in unclassified channels, do you agree that foreign
partners are less likely to share their information with us?
Mr. Overbaugh. Our foreign relationships are based on trust and
mutual benefit to our national security, which we will never violate.
For countries with whom we have intelligence sharing arrangements, we
commit to protecting information received from the partner. If
intelligence they provide to us begins to be treated arbitrarily, I
believe we could see a decrease in what they might be willing to share
with the United States.
12. Senator Reed. Mr. Overbaugh, if confirmed as Deputy Under
Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security (DUSD(I&S)), what
specific actions would you recommend to strengthen existing
intelligence and counterintelligence relationships with foreign
governments and international organizations?
Mr. Overbaugh. If confirmed, I will validate the State of existing
intelligence sharing arrangements with our allies and partners and
ensure efforts support U.S. national security objectives and the burden
of the associated intelligence activities is shared appropriately. I
will also take action to ensure the Defense Intelligence Enterprise is
pursuing cooperation, intelligence sharing, and interoperability to the
fullest practicable extent. By pursuing such collaborative efforts, the
United States and like-minded partners can optimize resources in
fiscally restrained environments to deepen coordination, strengthen
deterrence, preserve our warfighting advantage, and increase the
resilience of our force.
civilian workforce cuts and vulnerabilities
13. Senator Reed. Mr. Overbaugh, former intelligence officials have
expressed concern that the Trump administration's indiscriminate cuts
to the civilian workforce--including across the Department of Defense
(DOD) and the Intelligence Community--could create a significant
counterintelligence vulnerability. In your view, does sudden
professional and financial instability make a person more of a
counterintelligence risk?
Mr. Overbaugh. A top priority for the Department must be educating
our workforce, both current and former, on the threats posed by foreign
intelligence entities. If confirmed, I will assess the effectiveness of
our counterintelligence awareness and reporting programs, ensuring we
equip individuals to recognize and report targeting by foreign
adversaries. Critically, our awareness efforts must also highlight
support structures for personal challenges like mental health or
financial difficulties. While these challenges do not cause betrayal,
ensuring access to support can mitigate vulnerabilities and strengthen
our overall security posture.
strategic declassification of intelligence
14. Senator Reed. Mr. Overbaugh, in the lead up to Russia's
invasion of Ukraine, the Biden administration was successful in
deliberately releasing information derived from intelligence in an
effort to expose Russia's true plans and intentions and shape the views
of the international community. Previous Central Intelligence Agency
(CIA) Director Williams Burns published an article last year where he
emphasized the importance of ``strategic declassification'' or ``the
intentional public disclosure of certain secrets to undercut rivals and
rally allies.'' For years, the geographic combatant commands have been
pushing for more widespread use of strategic declassification in
support of information operations. What are your views on the
importance of strategic declassification of intelligence in support of
information operations?
Mr. Overbaugh. I recognize the strategic value of the carefully
considered declassification of intelligence. If confirmed, I will
approach declassification in support of information operations with a
focus on both maximizing its strategic benefit in the information
environment while upholding the principles of transparency and public
trust with respect to intelligence and other national security
information.
15. Senator Reed. Mr. Overbaugh, do you believe strategic
declassification could be used more widely while still protecting
sensitive sources and methods and what are the challenges from an
intelligence community perspective?
Mr. Overbaugh. I believe there is benefit to the selective
declassification or sanitization of information in support of foreign
policy objectives when it is done in a manner that takes into
consideration the overall effect on sources and methods. Usually, it is
not the one-time declassification of information that affects our
sources and methods, but a compilation of declassification activities
that can then cause harm.
defense intelligence and security enterprise
16. Senator Reed. Mr. Overbaugh, the Under Secretary of Defense for
Intelligence and Security (USD(I&S)) is vested with responsibility for
the overall direction and supervision of the Defense Intelligence and
Security Enterprise. What is your understanding of the role of the
Office of USD(I&S) in the oversight of the activities of the Defense
Intelligence and Security Enterprise?
Mr. Overbaugh. The USD(I&S) is responsible for planning, policy,
and strategic oversight for all defense intelligence,
counterintelligence and security policy, plans, and programs.
Additionally, the USD(I&S) exercises authority, direction, and control
over the Defense Intelligence Agency, National Geospatial Intelligence
Agency, National Security Agency, National Reconnaissance Office, and
the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) on behalf of
the Secretary of Defense.
17. Senator Reed. Mr. Overbaugh, if confirmed, how would you seek
to coordinate such activities across the broader Intelligence
Community?
Mr. Overbaugh. I take seriously the USD(I&S) oversight
responsibility of the activities of the Defense Intelligence and
Security Enterprise. If confirmed, I commit to taking an active
oversight role in the Enterprise to coordinate with the broader IC and
will support the USD(I&S)'s role as the DNI's Director for Defense
Intelligence. In doing so, I will ensure robust engagement with ODNI to
advocate for IC investments, capabilities, and activities that address
DOD requirements.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Jeanne Shaheen
anomalous health incidents
18. Senator Shaheen. Mr. Overbaugh, I've long been concerned about
directed energy attacks on our servicemembers, diplomats, and
Intelligence Community abroad. In 2021, Congress passed the HAVANA Act
and secured $10 million to help Anomalous Health Incident (AHI) victims
pay for their care. In the fall of 2024, DOD published its interim rule
that unlocked the ability to provide payments to victims.
Mr. Overbaugh. However, these payments have still not gone out and
I am hearing that victims are continuing to pay for care out of their
own pockets. My office has been in contact with former Defense
Intelligence Agency (DIA) officials who are going into debt to cover
their medical bills.
Brave men and women who have put their lives on the line for our
country are going into medical debt because they cannot access funds
meant for them is frustrating, to say the least. If confirmed, will you
commit to getting HAVANA Act payments out to the AHI victims as soon as
possible?
I share your concern regarding those who may have been affected by
Anomalous Health Incidents (AHI). I have not yet been briefed on the
status of HAVANA Act payments. However, I commit to you that I will
take actions necessary to expedite these payments if they have not been
made, as required.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Elizabeth Warren
ethics
19. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if you are confirmed, will you
commit not to seek any employment with or compensation from a defense
contractor, including through serving on a board, as a consultant, or
as a lobbyist, for 4 years after leaving DOD?
Mr. Overbaugh. I will abide by the extensive post-government
employment ethics rules required by Federal law as well as the terms of
my Ethics Agreement. These provisions set forth comprehensive
restrictions relating to acceptance of compensation from defense
contractors and communicating back to the Federal Government on behalf
of any future employers and clients. I believe that these existing
rules are appropriate and sufficient to protect the public interest. If
confirmed, I will carry out the responsibilities of my office
honorably, and I will seek any post-government employment in full
compliance with the applicable ethics rules.
20. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if you are confirmed, will you
commit not to engage in any lobbying activities, including unregistered
``shadow'' or ``behind-the-scenes'' lobbying under the guise of
consulting or advising, focused on DOD or any of its components for 4
years after leaving DOD?
Mr. Overbaugh. I will abide by the extensive post-government
employment ethics rules required by Federal law as well as the terms of
my Ethics Agreement. These provisions set forth comprehensive
restrictions relating to acceptance of compensation from defense
contractors and communicating back to the Federal Government on behalf
of any future employers and clients. I believe that these existing
rules are appropriate and sufficient to protect the public interest. If
confirmed, I will carry out the responsibilities of my office
honorably, and I will seek any post-government employment in full
compliance with the applicable ethics rules.
21. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, will you commit not to seek
employment, board membership with, or any other form of compensation
from a company that you regulated or otherwise interacted with while in
government, for at least 4 years after leaving office?
Mr. Overbaugh. I will abide by the extensive post-government
employment ethics rules required by Federal law as well as the terms of
my Ethics Agreement. These provisions set forth comprehensive
restrictions relating to acceptance of compensation from defense
contractors and communicating back to the Federal Government on behalf
of any future employers and clients. I believe that these existing
rules are appropriate and sufficient to protect the public interest. If
confirmed, I will carry out the responsibilities of my office
honorably, and I will seek any post-government employment in full
compliance with the applicable ethics rules.
22. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, during your nomination process,
did anyone on the Trump campaign, transition team, or other closely
related entity approach you about your loyalty to President Trump?
Mr. Overbaugh. No, I was not approached.
23. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if you were approached about
your loyalty to President Trump, did you sign a loyalty pledge or other
similar oath? If so, please provide a copy of the text of that pledge
or oath.
Mr. Overbaugh. No, I was not approached.
24. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if you were approached about
your loyalty to President Trump, did you make any verbal
representations of loyalty? If so, please describe this representation.
Mr. Overbaugh. No, I was not approached.
25. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, in November 2024, the New York
Times and other news outlets reported that Boris Epshteyn, a top
adviser to President Trump, allegedly requested payment from
prospective political appointees to promote their candidacies for top
positions within the Administration. Did you discuss the possibility of
joining the Administration with Mr. Epshteyn at any time?
Mr. Overbaugh. No.
26. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if you did discuss the
possibility of joining the Administration with Mr. Epshteyn, did Mr.
Epshteyn seek payment from you for promoting your candidacy for a
position within the Administration?
Mr. Overbaugh. No. I have never met with or spoken with Mr.
Epshteyn.
27. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, at any time, did lawyers for
President Trump or members of President Trump's team approach you
regarding Mr. Epshteyn and the allegations cited above? If so, please
describe the information that they provided you (including copies of
documents), what was discussed during any calls, and any other
information pertaining to this interaction.
Mr. Overbaugh. No.
28. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, were you in contact with Mr.
Elon Musk at any time during your nomination process? If so, please
describe the nature of those contacts.
Mr. Overbaugh. No. I have never met with or spoken to Mr. Musk.
29. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, was Mr. Musk present or involved
in any interviews you did related to your nomination? If so, please
describe the nature of his involvement.
Mr. Overbaugh. No.
30. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, was Mr. Musk involved in any way
with your nomination, including but not limited to directly or
indirectly contacting Senators regarding their position on your
nomination?
Mr. Overbaugh. No.
31. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, who was in the room or
participated in any of your interviews regarding your nomination?
Mr. Overbaugh. I met with various staffers from the Administration
before I was nominated, but the President nominate me.
32. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if you own any stock or hold any
other interest in any defense industry contractors, will you divest it
to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest?
Mr. Overbaugh. I will comply with all provisions of the Ethics
Agreement.
33. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, what do you consider the role of
the press in a democracy?
Mr. Overbaugh. The role of a free press is to inform the public,
hold power to account, and support democratic society by ensuring
transparency, fostering debate, and protecting individual rights.
34. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, do you think it would be an
appropriate use of taxpayer resources to ``dig up dirt'' on journalists
who investigate or criticize you, your office, or the Trump
administration?
Mr. Overbaugh. No.
35. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, will you commit not to
retaliate, including by denying access to government officials or
facilities, against news outlets or individual journalists who publish
articles that are critical of you, your office, your agency, or the
Trump administration?
Mr. Overbaugh. Yes.
36. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, have you requested, or has
anyone requested on your behalf, that any other person or third party
sign a nondisclosure, confidentiality, non-disparagement, or similar
agreement regarding your conduct in a personal or professional
capacity?
Mr. Overbaugh. No.
37. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, will you voluntarily release any
individual from any such agreements before this committee votes on your
nomination?
Mr. Overbaugh. Not Applicable.
38. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, have you ever paid or promised
to pay, or has anyone paid or promised to pay on your behalf, an
individual as part of any non-disclosure, confidentiality, non-
disparagement, or similar agreement?
Mr. Overbaugh. No.
39. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if the answer to the previous
question was yes, how much was promised, how much was paid, and what
were the circumstances?
Mr. Overbaugh. Not Applicable.
40. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, will you commit to recuse
yourself from all particular matters involving your former clients and
employers for the duration of your service at DOD?
Mr. Overbaugh. I will abide by the extensive post-government
employment ethics rules required by Federal law as well as the terms of
my Ethics Agreement. These provisions set forth comprehensive
restrictions relating to acceptance of compensation from defense
contractors and communicating back to the Federal Government on behalf
of any future employers and clients. I believe that these existing
rules are appropriate and sufficient to protect the public interest. If
confirmed, I will carry out the responsibilities of my office
honorably, and I will seek any post-government employment in full
compliance with the applicable ethics rules.
41. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, please provide a list of all
your clients at Strategic Decision Solutions, Arcuri Group LLC, and
Resilient National within the last 5 years.
Mr. Overbaugh. My Resilient National clients were Strategic
Decision Solutions and Keystone Bible Church. I do not have, and cannot
gain, access to Strategic Decision Solutions or Arcuri Group LLC for
the past 5 years. congressional Oversight and Transparency
42. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, what is your understanding of
the role of the Department of Defense Inspector General and service
Inspectors General?
Mr. Overbaugh. The Department of Defense Inspector General (DoD IG)
and the service Inspectors General (Army, Navy, Air Force, etc.) play
critical oversight roles within the U.S. military and defense
establishment. Their primary purpose is to ensure integrity,
efficiency, and accountability in defense operations and personnel
conduct.
43. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, will you ensure your staff
complies with any Inspector General deadlines established for requested
communications, documents, and witnesses, and that staff will be
protected from reprisal for their testimony?
Mr. Overbaugh. Yes.
44. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if you are not able to comply
with any Inspector General requests and deadlines, will you notify the
Republican and Democratic members of this committee regarding the basis
for any good faith delay or denial?
Mr. Overbaugh. If confirmed, I will work to comply with Inspector
General requests in a timely manner. I would defer to the Office of the
Inspector General to update members of the Committee regarding the
progress of the Inspector General's ongoing reviews.
45. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if you are confirmed, will you
commit to refusing to follow illegal orders from any individual,
including the President?
Mr. Overbaugh. If confirmed, I will follow the U.S. Constitution
and other laws of the United States.
46. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, what actions would you take if
you were given an illegal order from any individual, including the
President?
Mr. Overbaugh. I reject the premise of this question. The President
would never give me an illegal order. If confirmed, I would work with
appropriate officials if given an order that I believed was illegal.
47. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, will you commit to voluntarily
provide a deposition if you are requested by Congress to provide one?
Mr. Overbaugh. Yes.
48. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, will you commit to voluntarily
testify in front of Congress if you are requested by Congress to do so?
Mr. Overbaugh. Yes.
49. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, will you commit to testify or
provide a deposition in front of Congress if you are issued a subpoena
to do so?
Mr. Overbaugh. Yes.
50. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, will you commit to providing
information or documents to Congress voluntarily if you are requested
to do so?
Mr. Overbaugh. Yes.
51. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, will you provide information or
documents to Congress if you are issued a subpoena to do so?
Mr. Overbaugh. Yes.
52. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, will you commit to following
current precedent for responding to information requests, briefings,
and other inquiries from Congress, including the Senate and House Armed
Services Committees and their minority members?
Mr. Overbaugh. Yes.
53. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if confirmed, will you commit to
posting your official calendar monthly?
Mr. Overbaugh. If confirmed, I am committed to meeting all legal
disclosure requirements.
54. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, do you think the Federal
Government has an overclassification problem? If so, please provide
examples of overclassification you have encountered.
Mr. Overbaugh. I believe there is a widespread perception that the
Federal Government struggles with overclassification. I have not had
direct access to classified information in my current role to cite
specific examples, but I understand the concern that excessive
classification can hinder transparency, impede informed public
discourse, and stifle innovation. If confirmed, I commit to working
diligently to review classification procedures to ensure that
information is classified only when truly necessary to protect national
security and that declassification processes are efficient and
effective.
55. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if confirmed, do you think your
department should pursue strategic technology to support automated
declassification?
Mr. Overbaugh. Yes.
project 2025
56. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, have you discussed Project 2025
with any officials associated with the Trump campaign, the Trump
transition team, or other members of the Trump administration? If so,
please explain what you discussed, when you discussed it, and with whom
you discussed it.
Mr. Overbaugh. No.
57. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, have you discussed Project 2025
with any officials associated with the Heritage Foundation? If so,
please explain what you discussed, when you discussed it, and with whom
you discussed it.
Mr. Overbaugh. No. As far as I am aware, I do not know anyone in
the Heritage Foundation. I am, however, committed to hearing from and
engaging with a wide range of perspectives, those that I agree with,
those that I disagree with, and everyone in between. In addition, I
will always be transparent about my interactions and honest about how
those perspectives shape my understanding.
foreign influence
58. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, have you received any payment
from a foreign government or entity controlled by a foreign government
within the past 5 years?
Mr. Overbaugh. No, I have not.
59. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, have you communicated with any
foreign government or entity controlled by a foreign government within
the past 5 years?
Mr. Overbaugh. Yes. Through my work as a Military Intelligence
Officer, I have engaged with numerous FVEY, NATO, and other allies and
partners in the last 5 years. I have not engaged with any foreign
government or entity outside of my military requirements.
60. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, please disclose any
communications or payments you have had with representatives of any
foreign government or entity controlled by a foreign government within
the past 5 years and describe the nature of the communication.
Mr. Overbaugh. I have had no communications or payments as
described.
impoundment control act
61. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, do you believe the Secretary of
Defense or the Secretary of Energy has the legal authority to block the
disbursement of funds appropriated by Congress?
Mr. Overbaugh. I have no considered this issue before. If
confronted with this hypothetical, I would work with officials from the
Office of the General Counsel.
62. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, what is your understanding of
the Impoundment Control Act?
Mr. Overbaugh. My understanding is that Congress enacted the
Impoundment Control Act in 1974. This Act provides a framework for
handling circumstances in which the President seeks to defer or cancel
execution of appropriated funds. I commit, if confirmed, to executing
my responsibilities consistent with the U.S. Constitution and other
laws on this matter as on all others. I would ensure that my actions
and advice to the Secretary of Defense on this matter are informed by
the Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
General Counsel's office.
63. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, do you commit to complying with
the Impoundment Control Act?
Mr. Overbaugh. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
responsibilities consistent with the U.S. Constitution and other laws
on this matter as on all others. I would ensure that my actions and
advice to the Secretary of Defense on this matter are informed by the
Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
General Counsel's office.
64. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, do you commit to notifying the
Senate and House Armed Services Committees, including the majority and
minority, if you are asked not to comply with the Impoundment Control
Act or not to expend the money that Congress appropriates or
authorizes?
Mr. Overbaugh. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
responsibilities consistent with the U.S. Constitution and other laws
on this matter as on all others. I would ensure that my actions and
advice to the Secretary of Defense on this matter are informed by the
Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
General Counsel's office.
65. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, the Constitution's Spending
Clause (Art. I, Sec. 8, cl. 1) and Appropriations Clause (Art. I,
Sec. 9, cl. 7) give Congress, not the Executive, power of the purse.
The Supreme Court has unanimously upheld this power. Do you believe
that impoundments are constitutional?
Mr. Overbaugh. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
responsibilities consistent with the U.S. Constitution and other laws
on this matter as on all others. I would ensure that my actions and
advice to the Secretary of Defense on this matter are informed by the
Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
General Counsel's office.
66. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, the funding levels in
appropriations bills passed into law are not targets or ceilings;
instead, they are amounts the executive branch must spend, unless
stated otherwise. Congress could--if it wanted the President to have
discretion--write those amounts as ceilings. Do you agree?
Mr. Overbaugh. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
responsibilities consistent with the U.S. Constitution and other laws,
including appropriations legislation. I would ensure that my actions
and advice to the Secretary of Defense on this matter are informed by
the Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
General Counsel's office.
67. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, what is your understanding of
the requirements for DOD to obligate funding that Congress authorizes
and appropriates, in accordance with the time period that Congress
deems it to do so?
Mr. Overbaugh. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
responsibilities consistent with the U.S. Constitution and other laws,
including authorization and appropriations legislation. I would ensure
that my actions and advice to the Secretary of Defense on this matter
are informed by the Administration's legal positions and advice from
the Department's General Counsel's office.
68. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, do you commit to expending the
money that Congress appropriates and authorizes?
Mr. Overbaugh. If confirmed, I commit to expending resources in
accordance with congressional appropriations and authorizations for
those programs within my authority. I would ensure that my actions and
advice to the Secretary of Defense on this matter are informed by the
Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
General Counsel's office.
69. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, do you commit to following and
implementing every provision of the annual National Defense
Authorization Act passed into law?
Mr. Overbaugh. I commit, if confirmed, to executing my
responsibilities consistent with the U.S. Constitution and other laws,
including the National Defense Authorization Act. I would ensure that
my actions and advice to the Secretary of Defense on this matter are
informed the Administration's legal positions and advice from the
Department's General Counsel's office.
70. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if you became aware of a
potential violation of the Antideficiency Act, Impoundment Control Act,
or other appropriations laws, what steps would you take?
Mr. Overbaugh. If confirmed, were I to become aware of any
violation of the Antideficiency Act, Impoundment Control Act, or other
appropriations laws, I would abide by the Department's procedures to
report such violations to the appropriate authorities. I would further
ensure that my actions and advice to the Secretary of Defense regarding
any such violations are informed by the Administration's legal
positions and advice from the Department's General Counsel's office.
research and development
71. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, does the Federal Government
benefit from partnering with colleges, universities, nonprofits, and
federally funded research and development centers?
Mr. Overbaugh. Yes, I strongly believe the Federal Government
benefits significantly from engaging with certain colleges,
universities, nonprofits, and federally Funded Research and Development
Centers (FFRDCs). I understand that OUSD(I&S) sponsors a university
affiliated research center (UARC) to foster innovation and assist in
developing the next generation of talent in critical intelligence and
security career fields. I understand UARCs and FFRDCS are key to
addressing 21st century technology challenges by engaging academia,
government, and industry to provide objective, trusted advice on
critical national security issues.
72. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, under your leadership, will your
agencies continue to work with colleges, universities, nonprofits, and
federally funded research and development centers to research and
address our toughest national security challenges?
Mr. Overbaugh. If confirmed, I commit to continuing to engage with
FFRDCs, UARCs, and other institutions of higher learning to develop new
and transformative technology and analysis for the warfighter
consistent with the Administration's mission and priorities.
protecting classified information and federal records
73. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, what is your understanding of
the need to protect operational security, or OPSEC?
Mr. Overbaugh. I understand that protecting operations security
(OPSEC) is critical to safeguarding our national security. OPSEC
requires the identification and protection of critical information from
exploitation by adversaries. A strong OPSEC posture, built on awareness
and vigilance, is essential at all levels. If confirmed, I will
prioritize OPSEC, coupled with information security, to protect and
enable all our operations and decisions.
74. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, what are the national security
risks of improperly disclosing classified information?
Mr. Overbaugh. Improper disclosure of classified information poses
significant risks to our national security. It can compromise
intelligence sources and methods, putting lives at risk and hindering
our ability to gather critical intelligence. It can reveal sensitive
military plans and capabilities, giving adversaries an advantage on the
battlefield. It can undermine diplomatic efforts, damage relationships
with allies and partners, and erode trust in the United States.
Furthermore, it can harm our economic competitiveness by revealing
proprietary information and technological advantages. In short, the
improper disclosure of classified information can have far-reaching and
devastating consequences for our national security, and I take this
matter with the utmost seriousness.
75. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, what would you do if you learned
an official had improperly disclosed classified information?
Mr. Overbaugh. If I learned that an official had improperly
disclosed classified information, I would take immediate and decisive
action to ensure the incident is reported to the appropriate
authorities for investigation, contain the damage, assess the scope of
the disclosure, and work to mitigate any harm to national security. I
would also address any vulnerabilities in our security posture that
contributed to the disclosure. The protection of controlled and
classified information is paramount, and I would treat any breach with
the seriousness it deserves.
76. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, what is your understanding of
government officials' duties under the Federal Records Act?
Mr. Overbaugh. If confirmed, I will adhere to the Federal Records
Act and the applicable DOD policies that implement it, which ensure
that the Federal records I create or receive are appropriately
maintained, and I will hold the personnel of the Defense Intelligence
and Security Enterprise accountable for the same.
77. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, should classified information be
shared on unclassified commercial systems?
Mr. Overbaugh. No.
retaliation and protecting whistleblowers
78. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, do you believe that
servicemembers, civilians, grantees, and contractors should be
protected from any form of retaliation for coming forward about an
illegal order, sexual assault or harassment, negligence, misconduct, or
any other concern that they wish to raise?
Mr. Overbaugh. Yes, I do.
79. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, have you ever retaliated against
any individual for coming forward about an illegal order, sexual
assault or harassment, negligence, misconduct, or any other concern
that they wish to raise?
Mr. Overbaugh. No.
80. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if you are confirmed, will you
commit to protecting whistleblowers? If so, please specify how you will
do so.
Mr. Overbaugh. Yes, if confirmed, I will commit to protecting
whistleblowers in accordance with applicable law. I will foster a
culture where the organization understands that doing so supports the
mission.
81. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if you are confirmed, will you
commit to preventing retaliation against any individual for coming
forward about an illegal order, sexual assault or harassment,
negligence, misconduct, or any other concern that they wish to raise?
Mr. Overbaugh. Yes, I do.
82. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, do you consider it to be
retaliation to demote an individual, prevent the promotion or
advancement of an individual, remove an individual from the military or
their role, or take other adverse actions related to personnel
decisions for an individual, in response to that individual engaging in
protected activity?
Mr. Overbaugh. Yes, each of those actions could amount to an act of
retaliation, depending on the circumstances.
83. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, do you consider it to be
retaliation to encourage another person(s) to demote an individual,
prevent the promotion or advancement of an individual, remove an
individual from the military or their role, or take other adverse
actions related to personnel decisions for an individual, in response
to that individual engaging in protected activity?
Mr. Overbaugh. Yes, each of those actions could amount to an act of
retaliation, depending on the circumstances.
politicization of the military
84. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if confirmed, do you commit not
to retaliate against general officers or military servicemembers for
executing lawful policies enacted by a previous Administration?
Mr. Overbaugh. Yes, I do.
unauthorized disclosures
85. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, what is the normal process after
the Department becomes aware of indications that classified or
sensitive defense or intelligence information has been found in the
public sphere?
Mr. Overbaugh. I understand that DOD takes immediate action
whenever there is credible information that classified or sensitive
defense information has been found in the public sphere. This could
involve initiating an inquiry or investigation to assess the scope of
the potential compromise, secure any compromised information to the
extent possible, and identify the source of the unauthorized
disclosure. If circumstances warrant, DOD then pursues appropriate
administrative, legal, or other remedial actions based on the findings
of the inquiry or investigation.
86. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if confirmed, do you commit to
holding senior officials who violate protections of sensitive
information to the same standard as junior soldiers and civilians?
Mr. Overbaugh. All DOD personnel with access to classified
information are responsible for protecting such information. If
confirmed, I understand my responsibilities will include directing,
administering, and overseeing the DOD Information Security Program, on
behalf of the Secretary and Deputy Secretary. I will advocate for a
culture of accountability at all levels, backed up by clear,
modernized, and standardized guidance, to ensure that all DOD personnel
support this shared and sacred obligation.
87. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if confirmed, do you commit to
providing documented justifications to this Committee for any actions
taken to remove or re-detail individuals as a result of the memo
entitled ``Efforts to Combat Unauthorized Disclosures,'' dated 21 March
2025?
Mr. Overbaugh. Although I am familiar with the publicly released
memorandum, I am not familiar with actions or activities it may have
initiated. If I am confirmed, I would certainly anticipate being
brought up to speed on any such actions and will commit to working with
Congress, without impeding any investigative matters.
88. Senator Warren. Mr. Overbaugh, if confirmed, do you commit that
your deliberations and decisions will only be communicated through
official, secure channels and any decisions properly documented for
both oversight and institutional memory?
Mr. Overbaugh. If confirmed, I commit to ensuring that all
deliberations and decisions are communicated through official, secure
channels. Furthermore, I will ensure that all decisions are properly
documented to facilitate effective oversight and maintain institutional
memory. Recognizing the need for speed and security, I will also work
closely with the DOD CIO to ensure we have modernized communication
tools that enable secure decisionmaking at mission speeds. This is
critical for maintaining security, accountability, transparency, and
operational effectiveness within the organization.
______
[The nomination reference of Mr. Justin P. Overbaugh
follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The biographical sketch of Mr. Justin P. Overbaugh, which
was transmitted to the Committee at the time the nomination was
referred, follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The Committee on Armed Services requires all individuals
nominated from civilian life by the President to positions
requiring the advice and consent of the Senate to complete a
form that details the biographical, financial, and other
information of the nominee. The form executed by Mr. Justin P.
Overbaugh in connection with his nomination follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
------
[The nominee responded to Parts B-F of the committee
questionnaire. The text of the questionnaire is set forth in
the Appendix to this volume. The nominee's answers to Parts B-F
are contained in the committee's executive files.]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The nomination of Mr. Justin P. Overbaugh was reported to
the Senate by Chairman Wicker on May 13, 2025, with the
recommendation that the nomination be confirmed. The nomination
was confirmed by the Senate on September 18, 2025.]
------
[Prepared questions submitted to Mr. Daniel Zimmerman by
Chairman Wicker prior to the hearing with answers supplied
follow:]
Questions and Responses
duties and qualifications
Question. The Assistant Secretary of Defense for International
Security Affairs (ASD(ISA)) is the principal advisor to the Under
Secretary of Defense for Policy and the Secretary of Defense on
international security strategy and policy on issues of Defense
Department interest that relate to the nations and international
organizations of Europe (including the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization and Russia), the Middle East, Africa, and their
governments and defense establishments.
What is your understanding of the duties and functions of the
ASD(ISA) under current regulations and practices?
Answer. My understanding of the duties and functions of the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs
(ASD(ISA)) are based on U.S. code and applicable DOD guidance (see DOD
Directive 5111.07). Statutorily and by guidance the ASD(ISA), under the
authority, direction, and control of the Under Secretary of Defense for
Policy (USD(P)), is the principal civilian advisor to the Secretary of
Defense, Deputy Secretary of Defense, and the USD(P) on all matters
relating to international security strategy and policy issues related
to nations and international organizations in Europe, including the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the European Union;
Russia, Ukraine, and Eurasia; the Middle East; and Africa. To fulfill
the National Defense Strategy, the ASD(ISA) conducts defense relations
in this assigned area of responsibility, develops country-specific and
regional security strategy and policy, and issues guidance to translate
and incorporate national and DOD policy into these approaches.
Question. If confirmed, what additional duties and functions would
you expect the Secretary of Defense and the Under Secretary of Defense
for Policy to prescribe for you?
Answer. I am not aware of any additional duties and
responsibilities that would be prescribed by the Secretary, but I would
be prepared to assume additional ones that are compatible with
effectively meeting the core responsibilities and duties of the
position.
Question. What background and experience do you possess that
qualify you for this position?
Answer. I have enjoyed the tremendous privilege to serve my country
for nearly two decades in a variety of leadership and national security
roles through my career at the Central Intelligence Agency. My duties
have involved many of the most pressing issues confronting our national
security, including matters related directly to portfolio of the
ASD(ISA), as I understand it.
As a briefer for the President's Daily Brief, I presented our
government's most sensitive national security insights to senior
policymakers on a daily basis, discussing issues ranging from China and
advanced weapons to Iran and terrorism. I was a senior member of the
White House team that developed the Abraham Accords and participated in
diplomatic engagements throughout the Middle East. I have managed the
interagency process at both the Central Intelligence Agency and the
National Security Council (NSC), and I have led analytic teams on cyber
threats, energy security, and global trade. I have worked on sensitive
projects in the Eurasia theater and served alongside special operations
forces in the warzone. I have experience working closely with foreign
liaison partners worldwide to advance U.S. and shared interests. My
Senate fellowship in Senator Hagerty's office has equipped me with an
understanding and deep respect for the role of Congress in national
security policy. My academic background includes studies in
international diplomacy, military and economic statecraft, financial
mathematics, and history.
conflicts of interest
Question. Federal ethics laws, to include 18 U.S.C. Sec. 208,
prohibit government employees from participating in matters where they,
or certain family members or organizations with which they have certain
relationships, have a financial interest.
Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to disclose any
potential conflicts of interest, including investments, business ties,
family relationships, or other connections that could be perceived as
influencing your decisionmaking?
Answer. I agree to comply with all conflicts of interest disclosure
requirements set forth in the Ethics in Government Act and implementing
regulations.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, that
if a conflict of interest arises, you will recuse yourself from
participating in any decisions regarding that specific matter?
Answer. I agree to comply with all recusal requirements under 18
U.S.C. Sec. 208 and implementing regulations.
Question. Do you commit, without qualification, if confirmed, to
decide matters on the merits, and exclusively in the public interest,
without regard to private gain or personal benefit?
Answer. I commit to deciding matters on the merits based on the
public interest, without regard to any private gain or personal
benefit.
major challenges and priorities
Question. If confirmed, what broad priorities would you establish?
Answer. I support the President's America First, peace through
strength agenda. I agree with Secretary Hegseth that China and securing
the homeland constitute our country's top security challenges and are
the right priorities for defense policy.
If confirmed, I would work under Under Secretary Colby to further
the Department's policy objectives. As I understand them with respect
to the ASD(ISA) area of responsibility, these should include among
others pursuing a durable peace in Ukraine, spurring urgent defense
investments and greater responsibility from NATO allies, addressing
threats presented by Russia, partnering with key ally Israel, denying
Iran a nuclear weapon, countering terrorist threats to the homeland,
and preventing China from geostrategic advances in these theaters.
In addition to such policy aims, if confirmed, I would also strive
to provide diligent, accountable, and humble leadership in the
position.
Question. In your view, what are the major challenges, if any, you
would confront if confirmed as ASD(ISA)?
Answer. In my understanding, the major challenge of the ASD(ISA)
portfolio will be to help optimize the allocation of defense resources.
I agree with Secretary Hegseth that China and securing the homeland
must take precedence, and that reviving the defense industrial base and
enhancing readiness are fundamental to that. In my view, the ASD(ISA)
must be ready to help position the Department to focus on these
priorities while resolutely addressing persistent threats facing the
United States stemming from Russia, Iran, terrorism, and China's
expanding influence in the Middle East and Africa. I see effective
partner engagements that enable and drive greater burden sharing as
vital for this end.
If confirmed, I would also anticipate the organizational challenge
of quickly mastering Department processes and ensuring my advice,
leadership, and decisionmaking are timely, informed, and effective
toward furthering U.S. national security interests and Department
policy.
Question. If confirmed, what management actions and timelines would
you establish to address each of these challenges?
Answer. If confirmed, I would take a number of actions to address
these challenges, starting with understanding existing Departmental
guidance and requesting briefings on all the core elements of the
ASD(ISA) portfolio to ensure I am prepared to provide optimal advice
and support to Under Secretary Colby and Secretary Hegseth in advancing
the President's defense priorities. Based on previous interagency
management experience, I would plan to swiftly establish clear
communication and workflow practices, and to develop productive
relationships with my colleagues at DOD as well as with counterparts
across the NSC, State Department, Intelligence Community, and all
relevant departments. I would focus closely on upcoming allied
engagements to promote the Administration's clear message encouraging
allies and partners to take greater ownership of their security needs.
I would pursue excellent communication with Congress to ensure the
Department receives appropriate congressional input on matters related
to the ASD(ISA) portfolio.
detainee treatment and naval station guantanamo bay
Question. Do you support the standards for detainee treatment
specified in the revised Army Field Manual on Interrogations, FM 2-
22.3, issued in September 2006, and in DOD Directive 2310.01E, The
Department of Defense Detainee Program, dated August 19, 2014, and
required by section 1045 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2016 (Public Law 114-92)?
Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
question. My understanding is that the Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Special Operations and Low-Intensity conflict conducts oversight of
detainee treatment.
Question. What are your views on the continued use of the detention
facility at Naval Station Guantanamo Bay?
Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
question. My understanding is that the Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Special Operations and Low-Intensity conflict conducts oversight of
Guantanamo Bay operational policy.
Question. Executive Order 13567 established the Periodic Review
Board (PRB) Periodic Review of Individuals Detained at Guantanamo Bay
Naval Station Pursuant to the Authorization for Use of Military Force
process.
If confirmed, what specific actions would you take to address the
cases of detainees already recommended by a PRB for transfer from
Guantanamo to another nation?
Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
question.
Question. In your view, what standard of care should govern the
physical and mental health services provided to detainees at
Guantanamo, whether they are migrants or law of war detainees?
Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
question.
Question. What is your understanding of the authorities that are
available to the Department of Defense to transfer migrants and hold
them at Naval Station Guantanamo Bay?
Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
question.
Question. What are your views on the objectives and outcomes of the
Department's Military Commission process?
Answer. My understanding is that the Military Commissions process
provides standards and processes for trials of alien unprivileged enemy
belligerents for violations of the law of war and other offenses
triable by military commission. If confirmed, I would not anticipate
being directly involved in policy decisions regarding the Office of
Military Commissions and Military Commissions proceedings. However, I
support ensuring that policy is not an impediment to thorough and
speedy justice for those responsible for the 9/11 attacks and other
terrorist attacks.
Question. Section 2441 of title 18, U.S. Code, defines grave
breaches of common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, including
torture and cruel and inhuman treatment.
In your view, does section 2441 define these terms in a way that
provides U.S. detainees in the custody of other nations, as well as
foreign detainees in U.S. custody appropriate protections from abusive
treatment?
Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
question.
u.s. northern command/defense support to civilian authorities
Question. Civil authorities may request DOD support for domestic
disasters and certain counter-drug operations as well as in managing
the consequences of a terrorist event employing a weapon of mass
destruction.
In your view, are the procedures by which other Federal, State, and
Local agencies request DOD support efficient and effective?
Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
question. My understanding is that the Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Homeland Defense and Hemispheric Affairs oversees defense support
of civil authorities policy, authorities, and processes.
Question. In your view, are DOD procedures for evaluating and
approving the provision of support requested by a civil authority
efficient, effective, and timely?
Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
question.
Question. What is your understanding of the factors that are
considered in determining whether DOD will provide support to a civil
authority?
Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
question.
Question. What types of assistance in this context are
inappropriate, in your view?
Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
question.
Question. What role do you believe that DOD should play in
addressing security at the southwest border? What aspects of the
current DOD role at the southwest border, if any, could be improved?
Answer. My understanding is that the Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Homeland Defense and Hemispheric Affairs oversees defense support
of civil authorities policy, authorities, and processes.
u.s. southern command
Question. If confirmed, what recommendations would you make to the
President to deter Russian and Chinese influence in the SOUTHCOM AOR?
Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
question. My understanding is that the Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Homeland Defense and Hemispheric Affairs and the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Strategy, Plans, and Capabilities have
responsibility for DOD strategy and policy in the U.S. Southern Command
(USSOUTHCOM) area of responsibility (AOR) and the Western Hemisphere
and advise on USSOUTHCOM posture and activities.
Question. Do you believe these influences threaten hemispheric
security and prosperity?
Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
question.
counternarcotics activities (so/lic)
Question. DOD serves as lead agency for the detection and
monitoring of aerial and maritime foreign shipments of drugs flowing
toward the United States. On an annual basis, DOD expends nearly $1
billion to build the counternarcotics capacity of U.S. Federal, State,
and local law enforcement agencies and certain foreign governments.
What changes, if any, should be made to DOD's counternarcotics
strategy and supporting activities?
Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
question. I believe the narcotics threat facing our country is a true
menace and deserves an all-of-government response. My understanding is
that the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-
Intensity Conflict oversees the DOD counternarcotics program.
Question. Corruption and the absence of the rule of law enable the
transnational criminal organizations' narcotics trade that contributes
to the flow of illegal drugs into the United States.
In your view, what should be DOD's role in countering the flow of
narcotics to nations other than the United States?
Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
question.
Question. To what extent do you view our allies and partners in the
region as partners in countering counternarcotics and other illicit
activities?
Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
question.
Question. How, if at all, should U.S. security assistance be scoped
to address factors at the root of counternarcotics trafficking, in your
opinion?
Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
question.
approaches to strategic competition
Question. The Department of Defense published Interim National
Defense Strategic Guidance (INDSG) on March 13, 2025. The INDSG
supersedes the Biden Administration's 2022 National Defense Strategy.
The INDSG prioritizes defense of the homeland and deterrence of China
over all other threats. The underlying premise of the strategy assumes
that limited resources should serve to constrain America's strategic
appetite--indeed the INDSG indicates a preference for limited defense
spending and a reduced focus on Europe, the Middle East, and Africa.
In your view, what are the distinctions between the military
capabilities and capacities the United States needs to prevail in day-
to-day strategic competition with Russia and the capabilities and
capacities it needs to deter Russia's use of military force to achieve
political objectives and, if necessary, prevail in a military conflict
with the Russia?
Answer. In my understanding, the Department and the Administration
judges that U.S. military strategy needs to focus our resources on
defending the homeland and deterring China. For regions such as Europe
and the Middle East that still hold key U.S. interests, it will be
critical to maintain a network of allies and partners that the United
States can count on to field capabilities necessary to defend
themselves effectively, with more focused U.S. support. This applies
across the spectrum from competition to armed conflict and will require
many of our allies and partners, especially in Europe, to accelerate
investments in their militaries, societal resilience, and defense
industrial capacity. Fortunately, from public reporting, it seems that
our allies have heard this call and are stepping up to take greater
ownership of their defense needs. If confirmed, critical to my role
will be clearly and persuasively aligning our allies' defense goals
with those of the President.
Question. In your view, what are the enduring advantages that
enable the United States to prevail in strategic competition with
Russia and with China? If confirmed, what policies and approaches would
you implement to sustain and strengthen those advantages?
Answer. The United States must possess the world's most lethal
fighting force. If confirmed, I would work to sustain and strengthen
this advantage.
Question. In your assessment, what new capabilities are needed for
the Joint Force to compete below the threshold of armed conflict?
Answer. In my understanding, the United States is well positioned
to operate below the threshold of armed conflict to defend the Homeland
and deter China in the Indo-Pacific in alignment with the INDSG. If
confirmed, I commit to working with our Combatant Command and
Departmental leaders to understand and advocate for resourcing any
additional and novel capabilities in this space.
Question. If confirmed, what policies would you propose to counter
Russia's efforts to compete strategically below the threshold of armed
conflict in regions within the ASD(ISA)'s responsibility?
Answer. I would like to study this issue more closely and receive
the relevant briefings before offering a well-informed view. For allies
to contribute effectively to these strategies, they must surge defense
spending and swiftly strengthen security capabilities, as President
Trump and Secretary Hegseth have urged them to do. If confirmed as
ASD(ISA), securing greater allied burden sharing and accountability
will be one of my top priorities.
Question. What is your assessment of the military threat posed by
the People's Republic of China in the regions within the ASD(ISA)'s
responsibility?
Answer. The military threat posed by China is the most serious and
pressing for the United States. The 2025 Annual Threat Assessment of
the U.S. Intelligence Community states that China presents the most
comprehensive and robust military threat to U.S. national security. The
heightened risk of simultaneous aggression against the United States
and its allies is a significant and growing challenge. European nations
stepping up and leading on conventional defense and deterrence of
Russia in Europe will be vital to mitigate the threat of simultaneous
aggression against the United States and its allies. The presence of
China in the Middle East threatens a key geographic area which could
become critical in the event of a Pacific contingency. In Africa, China
has deepened engagement to bolster relationships with African countries
and their militaries. China has looked to gain African countries'
support for establishing maritime points of presence to advance its
goal of developing the People's Liberation Army into a global
expeditionary force that can project power well beyond the Indo-
Pacific.
Question. What is your assessment of the military threat posed by
Russia?
Answer. Russia's nuclear, missile, and other asymmetric
capabilities enable Russia to pose a direct military threat to the
United States, the rest of NATO, and other allies. Russia's battle-
hardened military poses a serious threat to Eastern Europe, including
NATO members.
Question. What is your assessment of the threat posed by collusion
among Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea?
Answer. I am deeply concerned that China, Russia, Iran, and North
Korea have increasingly collaborated with each other in recent years,
presenting heightened security challenges to the United States and our
allies. The United States must take such coordination seriously, since
too many of our allies are inadequately prepared to assume greater
security burdens, and the United States itself would be hard pressed to
adequately fight multiple major wars. This is a key challenge I would
focus on addressing if confirmed as ASD(ISA).
Question. In your view, should the Defense Department's force
sizing construct be based on the need to conduct simultaneous conflicts
in Asia and Europe?
Answer. In my view, a strategy that prioritizes defending the
homeland and deterring China while fostering increased burden-sharing
from allies and partners, especially in Europe, is the best force
planning construct. This can position the United States and our allies
to deter--or if necessary fight and win--simultaneous conflicts in the
Indo-Pacific and Europe.
Question. If confirmed, what would you do if you determine that the
DOD cannot meet the demands placed on it by the President's defense
strategy?
Answer. The Department must be responsive to the President. If
confirmed, I would work under the guidance of the Secretary and USD(P)
to ensure we prioritize the Department's activities and resources to
achieve the President's intent.
Question. How do you view issues of economic competition as part of
the border strategic competition environment? What role, if any, should
DOD have in assessing, influencing or impacting economic competition as
part of its broader strategy?
Answer. I strongly support Secretary Hegseth's goal of rebuilding
the military by reviving our defense industrial base, reforming our
acquisition process, passing a financial audit, and rapidly fielding
emerging technologies. I see the combination of these initiatives being
the foundation of DOD's role in supporting a broader U.S. Government
strategy for economic competition.
u.s. european command (eucom)
Question. Do you believe the deterrent posture in Europe is
sufficient to deter further Russian aggression in Europe?
Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
question. I understand the Department of Defense has begun conducting a
global force posture review to assess the effectiveness of existing
missions and forces assigned to USEUCOM. If confirmed, I would actively
engage in this effort, including addressing this question.
Question. In your assessment, are there capability and/or capacity
shortfalls in current U.S. posture that affect the U.S. ability to
carry out the EUCOM Theater Campaign Plan?
Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
question. I understand the Department of Defense has begun conducting a
global force posture review to assess the effectiveness of existing
missions and forces assigned to USEUCOM. If confirmed, I would actively
contribute to this effort, including addressing this question.
Question. In your assessment, does the United States have
sufficient air and missile defense capability and capacity to defend
critical infrastructure in EUCOM? If not, what are the areas of highest
risk?
Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
question. I understand the Department of Defense has begun conducting a
global force posture review to assess the effectiveness of existing
missions and forces assigned to USEUCOM. If confirmed, I would actively
contribute to this effort, including addressing this question.
Question. If confirmed, what specific changes would you make to
U.S. capabilities or force posture in Europe to execute the Interim
National Defense Strategic Guidance more effectively?
Answer. I am not in a position to give an informed answer to this
question. I understand the Department of Defense has begun conducting a
global force posture review to assess the effectiveness of existing
missions and forces assigned to USEUCOM using the INDSG to guide the
process. If confirmed, I would actively contribute to this effort,
including addressing this question.
Question. Defender Europe 2025 and other exercises the United
States conducts with European Allies and partners illustrate our
collective ability to mobilize large forces rapidly to respond to a
crisis.
Do you support DOD maintaining the large scale and frequent
exercises it has conducted in Europe in recent years?
Answer. If confirmed, I would review the resource requirements
necessary to achieve our national security objectives in Europe in
light of our global strategic and defense priorities as indicated by
President Trump and Secretary Hegseth.
European Deterrence Initiative (EDI)
Question. Since establishment of the EDI in 2014, the NDAA has
authorized billions of dollars each year for EDI investments to support
stability and security, and to deter Russian aggression.
In your view, has EDI improved U.S. and allied capability and
capacity to deter Russian aggression in the European theater?
Answer. If confirmed, I would review and provide my best advice to
my leadership on the allocation of resources across the different
theaters and recommend investments that best protect U.S. interests,
deter conflict, and leverage the investments of our allies to provide
for their own defense.
Question. Do you believe continued, robust funding for programs,
activities, and investments under EDI's five lines of effort is
required to support implementation of EUCOM's mission to deter and
defend against aggression?
Answer. It is my understanding that the EDI's lines of effort--
increased presence, exercises and training, enhanced prepositioning,
improved infrastructure, and building partner capacity--have
contributed to the capabilities and readiness of U.S. forces in
USEUCOM, of NATO allies, and of regional partners. If confirmed, I
would review the resource requirements necessary to achieve our
national security objectives in Europe in light of our global strategic
and defense priorities as indicated by President Trump and Secretary
Hegseth.
NATO Alliance
Question. In your view, how important to U.S. strategic interests
is the U.S. commitment to its obligations under the North Atlantic
Treaty, especially Article 5?
Answer. I believe NATO holds far-reaching importance for the United
States and that our commitments to the alliance are grave and serious.
My understanding is that the President has said the United States
remains committed to NATO. The United States remains the only country
that has invoked Article 5 commitments, which gives that provision
special significance. President Trump and Secretary Hegseth have been
clear that Article 3 is also important, and I agree with the
Administration's vision for all members to contribute to a NATO that is
more lethal, ready, and relevant. The alliance must adapt, and if
confirmed it will be my particular responsibility to ensure that
European and Canadian NATO allies do their part.
Question. What do you view as the essential strategic objectives of
the NATO Alliance and what do you perceive to be the greatest
challenges in meeting those objectives?
Answer. My understanding is that NATO's strategic objectives are to
deter conflict in Europe and defeat threats to treaty Allies should
deterrence fail. NATO is, and should refocus on being, a military
alliance to defend the member states in the Euro-Atlantic area. A great
challenge to those objectives is that Russia now has a battle-hardened
military while Europe's development of combat-credible forces and its
defense industrial base has lagged. Meanwhile, China poses a grave and
near-term threat to U.S. interest in the Indo-Pacific. A sense of
urgency among our allies is needed to achieve a NATO that is more
lethal, ready, and relevant.
Question. NATO has long held the position that, ``as long as
nuclear weapons exist, NATO will remain a nuclear alliance.'' In your
view, do you believe this principle requires the United States to
continue to deploy nuclear weapons in NATO countries?
Answer. I support this principle, and my understanding is that the
presence of U.S. nuclear weapons in Europe has proven to be a key
tenant of the alliance and played a fundamental role deterring conflict
and aggression.
Question. Do you believe that NATO should expand the nuclear
sharing role to additional alliance members?
Answer. I understand this has been a topic of ongoing debate in
think tank channels, but I would like to study this question more
closely and receive briefings on the topic before offering a view. I do
not have sufficient information at this time to give an informed
answer.
Question. What do you see as the benefits, or negative
consequences, of NATO countries individually pursuing their own nuclear
weapons?
Answer. I would like to study this question more closely and have
an opportunity to engage our NATO allies on their views of NATO's
nuclear deterrence posture before offering my own perspective. If
confirmed, I would make it a priority to assess and engage on this
issue in light of our global defense requirements in this critical
area.
Question. The dual-hatted position of the Commander of EUCOM as
NATO's Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) allows U.S. and Allied
forces to be highly integrated in Europe. Similar dual-hat
responsibilities have been integrated to other senior U.S. Commanders,
including Commander of U.S. Air Forces Europe and Africa as Commander
NATO Allied Air Command (AIRCOM) and Commander U.S. Army Europe and
Africa as NATO Allied Land Command Commander.
What is your assessment of the benefits of these dual-hatted
structures to allied cohesion and integration?
Answer. I am not currently in a position to make a fully informed
analysis of the pros and cons of the dual-hatted structures.
Question. Do you share current EUCOM Commander General Cavoli's
view that the dual-hatted role for the EUCOM Commander as SACEUR is
important and, as he testified to the Senate Armed Services Committee,
that not having an American in the role of SACEUR ``would bring some
challenges in terms of nuclear command and control''?
Answer. The SACEUR is an important position and I am not aware of
any Department plans to relinquish it. If confirmed, I would consult
with my leadership as well as military colleagues in the Joint Staff
and USEUCOM prior to making recommendations.
Russia
Question. In your view, does Russia pose a threat to the United
States, its allies, or its interests in the AOR and globally? If so,
please describe how you perceive that threat.
Answer. Yes. Despite facing international sanctions since 2014,
which were further strengthened during the first Trump Administration,
Russia has maintained a capable military, developed its strategic
capabilities, and increased production of crucial military equipment.
Of particular concern is Russia's expansion of its nuclear arsenal,
posing a threat to the U.S. homeland, as well as its tactical nuclear
weapons, which threaten its European and Asian neighbors. Russia also
presents challenges in cyberspace, undersea, space, and the Arctic.
Question. In your view, which EUCOM and NATO activities most
effectively deter Russia and mitigate the Russian threat to NATO
Allies?
Answer. I do not believe I am not in a position at this time to
give the informed answer this question deserves. I understand the
Department of Defense has begun conducting a global force posture
review to assess the effectiveness of existing missions and forces
assigned to USEUCOM. If confirmed, I would actively support USD(P) in
this effort, including addressing this question.
Question. What aspects of U.S. and NATO force posture do you assess
as having the most significant deterrent effect on Russia?
Answer. I do not believe I am not in a position at this time to
give the informed answer this question deserves. I understand the
Department of Defense has begun conducting a global force posture
review to assess the effectiveness of existing missions and forces
assigned to USEUCOM. If confirmed, I would actively support USD(P) in
this effort, including addressing this question.
Question. In your view, what more should DOD do to counter Russian
malign influence in Europe?
Answer. While I have worked on this issue extensively from within
the Intelligence Community, I do not believe I am not in a position at
this time to give the informed answer this question deserves from a DOD
perspective. I understand the Department of Defense has begun
conducting a global force posture review to assess the effectiveness of
existing missions and forces assigned to USEUCOM. If confirmed, I would
actively support USD(P) in this effort, including addressing this
question.
Ukraine
Question. In February 2022, Russia launched a full-scale,
unprovoked, and illegal invasion in Ukraine.
What do you believe to be Russia's military objectives in Ukraine?
Answer. I do not believe I have all the relevant information at my
disposal, including classified information, to fully assess this
question.
Question. What do you believe would be the implications for United
States national security interests if Russia were able to achieve its
goals in Ukraine?
Answer. Russia remains a serious military threat to U.S. and
European security, and thus credible deterrence remains a strategic
imperative. As President Trump has repeatedly emphasized, it is vitally
important that our European allies lead from the front in providing
security assistance to Ukraine and deterring further Russian
aggression, including by rapidly increasing their own defense spending
and production.
Question. Do you believe it is important for the United States to
continue support, including security assistance to help Ukraine deter
and defeat Russian aggression? If not, why not?
Answer. If confirmed, I would support the Administration's goal to
forge a durable peace in Ukraine. I believe it is important for Ukraine
to be well-armed to support its self-defense, even after the war is
concluded. My understanding is that the United States has already
contributed a very great deal to Ukraine's defense and must weigh
future assistance against urgent security needs elsewhere, including
protecting U.S. territorial integrity and deterring threats from China.
The President has rightly emphasized Europe should lead from the front
in securing Ukraine's future. If confirmed, I would make it a priority
to advance this overall approach.
u.s. africa command (africom)
Question. AFRICOM has minimal assigned forces and, as a result, is
required to compete for the vast majority of its U.S. forces in the
global force management process.
What is your assessment of the availability and predictability of
forces and associated capabilities to support the AFRICOM Theater
Campaign Plan, the NDS, and other emergency requirements?
Answer. It is my understanding that USAFRICOM has no assigned
forces and fewer allocated forces than most other Combatant Commands. I
also understand that it competes for capabilities when it faces an
emerging requirement. If confirmed, I would carefully review all
requirements to provide the best advice on whether existing missions
and forces allocated to USAFRICOM are sufficient to support DOD's
priorities given the competitive geostrategic environment.
Question. Are there any changes you would recommend to the
allocation or assignment of forces to AFRICOM, if confirmed?
Answer. If confirmed, I would carefully review all requirements to
provide the best advice on whether existing missions and forces
assigned to USAFRICOM are sufficient to support DOD's priorities given
the competitive geostrategic environment.
Question. What should be the primary objectives of the DOD
specifically, and the United States more broadly, in the AFRICOM AOR?
Answer. In my understanding, the Department's two key objectives in
the USAFRICOM AOR are to degrade terrorist groups' ability to strike
the U.S. homeland or overseas equities and to counter China's attempts
to project military power.
Question. What is your assessment of the strategic objectives of
Russia and China in Africa? In what areas, if any, do these oppose U.S.
and partner objectives?
Answer. With 53 countries in USAFRICOM's AOR it is hard to
generalize, yet my understanding is that China and Russia both actively
seek deeper engagement and influence across the continent. China has
sought to bolster relationships with African countries and their
militaries and to use investment to create dependencies, while gaining
African countries' support for its global policy objectives. China
looks to Africa as a launchpad for expanding military power beyond the
Pacific. Meanwhile, Russia uses extractive and destabilizing means to
assert influence in Africa, including paramilitary deployments, seeking
to create dependencies on Russian military assets. These activities are
too often at the expense of African countries and opposed to U.S. and
partners' shared objectives for stability and security.
u.s. central command (centcom)
Question. In your opinion, what are the key U.S. national security
interests in the Middle East? Please explain your answer.
Answer. In my view, key U.S. national security interests in the
Middle East include countering terrorist threats to the homeland,
denying Iran a nuclear weapon and intercontinental ballistic missiles,
promoting the security of model ally Israel, supporting the free flow
of goods and trade, and generally acting increasingly as a security
enabler and integrator for our regional partners.
Counterterrorism remains a key national security priority in the
USCENTCOM AOR. Several terrorist groups aspire to possess either the
intent or capability to strike the U.S. homeland or U.S. personnel.
The Middle East also remains at risk of nuclear proliferation by
Iran. If confirmed, I will help ensure that the Department of Defense
stands ready to support the President's National Security Presidential
Memorandum on Iran, which among other provisions specifically says it
is the policy of the United States to deny Iran a nuclear weapon.
The United States has strong partners in the Middle East with whom
we have overlapping interests, long-standing cooperation, and
substantial economic and technological trade ties.
Question. In your opinion, to what extent does achieving U.S.
national security interests in the Middle East require a continuous
U.S. military presence, and in your view is the current U.S. force
presence appropriately sized? Please explain your answer.
Answer. I understand the Department is currently reviewing global
force posture to ensure the optimal level of forces are assigned to
USCENTCOM to achieve regional and global defense strategy goals. If
confirmed, I would support this review and advise the Secretary and
USD(P) on the force posture necessary to achieve the President's
national security objectives. It is my understanding that the
Department of Defense strives to maintain the capability to surge
forces anywhere in the world to respond to regional threats and
emerging crises.
Question. What opportunities exist for increasing burden-sharing
with U.S. partners to counter threats emanating from and affecting the
CENTCOM AOR?
Answer. My understanding is that the United States collaborates
effectively with multiple partners in the region to counter threats
emanating from and affecting the USCENTCOM AOR. I believe our partners
can and must take greater ownership of their own defense. This is both
in their interest and ours. If confirmed, I would seek increased
opportunities to enable regional partners to counter terrorist groups,
defend their sovereign territories, and cooperate on countering Iran
and its threat network.
Question. What threat does Chinese and Russian involvement in the
Middle East pose to U.S. operations and interests and to what extent
does a continuous U.S. presence counter their involvement? In your
view, what other policy tools might be useful in this regard?
Answer. Given its size, energy resources, location, and other
factors, the Middle East is relevant to great power competition with
China and Russia. The United States can counter Chinese and Russian
involvement in the region through strong relationships with partners
who are enabled and empowered across a full spectrum of activities.
Iran
Question. What is your understanding of the objectives of the U.S.
national security interests with respect to Iran? What is the role of
the U.S. military in this strategy?
Answer. I fully support the President's National Security
Presidential Memorandum on Iran, which establishes that: 1) Iran should
be denied a nuclear weapon and intercontinental ballistic missiles; 2)
Iran's terrorist network should be neutralized; and 3) Iran's
aggressive development of missiles, as well as other asymmetric and
conventional weapons capabilities, should be countered. The U.S.
military, alongside other elements of national power and allied
capabilities, plays a critical role in this strategy.
Question. What is your assessment of the current military threat
posed by Iran? What is your assessment of the threat posed by Iranian
proxy groups? In your opinion, what is the most effective way to defeat
Iranian proxy groups?
Answer. Iran poses a significant threat to the security of the
United States and its allies and partners. Last year, Iran launched two
unprecedented major missile and drone barrages against Israel from
Iranian territory. In addition to its conventional military, Iran also
leverages proxy forces to launch kinetic attacks and advance Tehran's
aims across the Middle East. These forces have been significantly
weakened but still threaten U.S. forces and our partners. Iran also
continues to further its ability to gain a nuclear weapons capability,
which the President has rightly said cannot happen.
Question. In your view, what would be the security implications for
U.S. and regional security interests should Iran acquire a nuclear
weapons capability?
Answer. The President has said clearly that the United States will
not allow Iran to obtain a nuclear weapon, and I support that position.
The President has also clearly expressed his preference to negotiate an
agreement that prevents Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. I support
the President's policy approach to produce a far better agreement than
the shortsighted Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. For its part, the
Department's role is to ensure that the President is armed with the
best possible military options to deny Iran a nuclear weapon. If
confirmed, I would regard it as my responsibility to ensure that the
Secretary and the President have the best possible military options for
this purpose.
Question. In your opinion, can Iran be sufficiently deterred
through military force alone? Please explain your answer.
Answer. I support the President's stated intent to address Iran's
malign activity through non-military tools if possible, including
economic pressure and diplomacy. At the same time, it is the Department
of Defense's role to ensure the President is armed with the best
possible military options. If confirmed, I would ensure the President
has these.
Israel
Question. In your opinion, what are U.S. national security
objectives with regards to Israel?
Answer. I believe that the U.S.-Israel alliance is of great
importance to the United States and that enabling Israel's security and
ability to defend itself is a key U.S. national security objective.
Israel is a model ally for the United States in its self-reliance,
independence, and grit. My understanding is that the Department of
Defense supports Israel's security by helping facilitate security
assistance to Israel, extensive military cooperation through USCENTCOM
channels, and through coordination with the Israelis to help secure the
release of all hostages held by Hamas, including American citizens.
Question. In your opinion, what should DOD's role be in supporting
Israeli efforts to degrade and defeat Hamas?
Answer. If confirmed, I would fully back U.S. support for Israel's
security and its ability to defend itself. Hamas started this war on
October 7, 2023 by launching a horrific and unprovoked terrorist attack
on Israel. Hamas killed more than 1,200 innocent people, including 46
Americans, and took some 250 hostages. The United States should provide
the security assistance that Israel needs to defeat Hamas and prevent
future attacks. I support measures by the Trump Administration to
bolster support to Israel, including through the release of the
shipment of 2,000 lb. bombs previously paused.
Question. Should U.S. policy toward Israel include work toward a
two-State solution?
Answer. From a Department of Defense standpoint, U.S. policy toward
Israel should support U.S. interests, which includes close partnership
with our model ally Israel and the re-establishment of deterrence and
stability in the region. If confirmed, I would support the President's
vision for peace in the Middle East.
Syria and Iraq
Question. What is your understanding of current U.S. strategy and
objectives in Syria? How have those objectives changed, if at all, in
light of the fall of the Assad regime?
Answer. My understanding is that the Department is closely watching
developments in Syria with a primary objective of maintaining pressure
on ISIS and responding to any other terrorist threats to the United
States that arise, while, as President Trump has indicated, limiting
the U.S. presence there. If confirmed, I would work to continue to
review our objectives in light of the fall of the Assad regime.
Question. From a DOD perspective, what must be done to ensure the
enduring defeat of ISIS? What non-military efforts are needed for the
enduring defeat of ISIS?
Answer. I understand that the U.S. military supports the enduring
defeat of ISIS through counterterrorism operations and by enabling key
ally and partner militaries to assume the burden for addressing
terrorist threats within their own countries. More broadly, the
enduring defeat of ISIS will require a whole-of-government effort, to
include intelligence and law enforcement.
Question. What do you perceive to be the role of the Syrian
Democratic Forces and Iraqi Security Forces in countering ISIS and al
Qaeda?
Answer. My understanding is that these partners have played a
critical role in our efforts to counter ISIS and al Qaeda. If
confirmed, I would seek the appropriate briefings on the current role
of these forces to ensure a full-picture assessment and determination
on the future of U.S. counterterrorism policy in the region.
Question. In your view, should U.S. troop levels in Syria be tied
to the achievement of certain conditions on the ground? If so, what
conditions would you factor into your recommendation to the President
on future troop levels in Syria?
Answer. My understanding is that the Secretary as of mid-April has
directed a consolidation of U.S. forces in Syria, reflecting the
significant achievements we have made toward degrading ISIS that go
back to President Trump's first term. Moving forward, the deployment of
U.S. troops in any foreign country should always be tied to specific
objectives and conditions. If confirmed, I would review this issue
closely and shape my recommendations to the USD(P) by this principle.
Question. In September 2024, the U.S.-Iraq Higher Military
Commission announced the transition of the global coalition to defeat
ISIS to a bilateral security relationship with the Government of Iraq.
However, many of the details of such a transition are still being
negotiated with the Iraqi Government.
In your view, what should the guiding principles for DOD's presence
in Iraq moving forward?
Answer. The deployment of U.S. troops in any foreign country should
be assessed continually based on changing objectives and conditions on
the ground. If confirmed, I would seek a thorough analysis along these
lines prior to making a recommendation.
Question. Do you assess that U.S. forces should remain in Iraq
beyond next September? Why or why not?
Answer. My understanding is that the United States and Iraq agreed
in September 2024 to wind down Operation INHERENT RESOLVE inside Iraq
by September 2025, and to continue counter-ISIS operations in Syria
from Iraq until at least September 2026. If confirmed, I would study
the security implications of this matter closely and ensure that they
are considered in the global force posture review.
Middle East Regional Partners
Question. In your view, what support should DOD provide the
Lebanese Armed Forces?
Answer. My understanding is that the Department's current
objectives are to strengthen Lebanon's sovereignty by building the
capabilities of the Lebanese Armed Forces to counter internal and
terrorist threats and combat corruption. I understand that the aim of
these capacity building efforts is to reduce regional tensions, improve
Israel's security along its northern border, and further degrade Iran's
influence in Lebanon. If confirmed, I would look at whether these
efforts are performing against their objectives and generally be open
to DOD support that advances the Administration's security assistance
priorities in the Middle East and beyond.
Question. In your view, what support should DOD provide to the
Jordanian Armed Forces?
Answer. If confirmed, I would look at this question closely and
generally be open to DOD support that advances the Administration's
security assistance priorities in the Middle East and beyond. Jordan
has proven itself an important U.S. partner for promoting regional
stability. My understanding is that the Department already works with
Jordan to enhance the capabilities of the Jordanian Armed Forces to
defeat threats posed by terrorist organizations, including ISIS, to
counter the smuggling of narcotics and illicit weapons across Jordan's
borders, and to detect and intercept unmanned aerial systems and
missile threats that continue to violate Jordanian sovereignty and
endanger U.S. and partner forces in the region.
Defense Security Cooperation
Question. In your view, what are the necessary and appropriate
strategic objectives that should underpin the Defense Department's
approach to building the capabilities of a partner nation's security
forces?
Answer. The Department's approach to building the capabilities of
foreign partners should advance U.S. national security and foreign
policy objectives and must be planned and resourced accordingly. If
confirmed, I would conduct and manage defense relations within the
ASD(ISA) portfolio to further the Administration's objectives of
increased readiness, complementary alliances, and greater burden
sharing.
Question. In the competition with near-peer rivals, what steps
would you recommend, if confirmed, to ensure that the United States is
taking a strategic approach to its security cooperation with allies and
partners?
Answer. If confirmed, I will review the specific steps needed to
ensure that security cooperation is appropriately aligned with the
Administration's strategic objectives. In a resource-constrained
environment, the Department's security cooperation activities must be
carefully tailored toward the highest-priority threats facing the
United States.
Question. Do you have any recommendations for how to improve
coordination of international armaments cooperation activities,
including FMS, across the various stakeholders in Policy, A&S, and R&E?
Answer. I believe it is vital to bring efficiency to the foreign
military sales (FMS) process. If confirmed, I will review existing
rules and regulations involved in the development, execution, and
monitoring of foreign defense sales, look for opportunities to increase
government-industry collaboration, and advance our competitiveness
abroad.
Question. Do you have views on how DOD might be able to streamline
and improve that parts of the FMS process under its control to improve
coordination and timeliness?
Answer. The United States must maintain the strongest and most
technologically advanced military in the world, along with a robust
network of capable partners and allies. In my understanding, the FMS
process is a vital part of encouraging our allies to strengthen their
defense capabilities and increase burden sharing. I believe the FMS
process should be agile, able to adapt to demands and respond to
current and emerging security concerns. If confirmed, I will review
existing processes and collaborate with the relevant stakeholders in
the FMS process to further the Administration's goals of improving
accountability and transparency in the FMS system, and to ensure
predictable and reliable delivery of capabilities to our allies and
partners.
cyber
Question. In September 2023, DOD released its 2023 Cyber Strategy.
The strategy charges DOD to persistently engage malicious cyber actors
and other malign threats to U.S. interests in cyberspace.
What do you perceive to be the role of the ASD(ISA) in
accomplishing these objectives, and how will you deconflict with the
roles and responsibilities of the newly established ASD(Cyber Policy)?
Answer. The ASD for Cyber Policy (CP) is the senior official
responsible for overall supervision of DOD policy for cyber issues and
is the Principal Cyber Advisor to the Secretary of Defense. If
confirmed, I will work with the ASD(CP) to ensure the Department is
best positioned to deter adversaries and non-State entities from
seeking to threaten the political, military, or economic preeminence of
the United States. In that vein, I will support ASD(CP)'s role by
reflecting the President's and Secretary's objective of increasing
DOD's effectiveness in the cyber domain in my own bilateral and
multilateral engagements, including through coordination and
deconfliction of cyber activities and operations with highly capable
allies and partners.
Question. If confirmed, how would you plan to strengthen the role
between your office and other DOD organizations that contribute to
these objectives, such as United States Cyber Command and the ASD for
Cyber Policy?
Answer. If confirmed, I will work in close collaboration with the
ASD(CP) and the Commander of USCYBERCOM to ensure the Department's
cyber policies are consistent with the Administration's priorities, as
they relate to alliances and partnerships falling under the ASD(ISA)
portfolio.
Question. What role do you see ASD(ISA) having in integrating cyber
into broader defense strategies for deterrence or force employment?
Answer. ASD(ISA) is responsible for managing the Department's
relationships with key allies and partners, many of which are highly
capable in the cyber domain. I believe ASD(ISA) should play a role in
integrating our military cyberspace capabilities with other tools of
national power, such as intelligence, diplomacy, and economic sanctions
to advance U.S. national security objectives. If confirmed, I will work
closely with ASD(CP) and other key stakeholders in the Department such
as USCYBERCOM and other Combatant Commands to integrate the strengths
of our most advanced cyber partnerships into our broader deterrence and
defense planning, force employment planning, and strategy formulation.
Question. What role do you see for ASD(ISA) in international cyber
engagement activities, including the potential of cyber tools and
equipment for consideration in the FMS process?
Answer. President Trump and Secretary Hegseth have been clear that
in order to restore peace through strength, the Department must defend
the homeland, deter China, and increase burden-sharing with allies and
partners to address all threats. If confirmed as ASD(ISA), I will work
closely with ASD(CP) to ensure that the cyber tools and equipment we
share with international partners in my portfolio enable them to
reinforce the security of Department of Defense networks, U.S.
Government critical infrastructure, and the American people. In my own
engagements with international partners, I will reinforce the
imperative of protecting sensitive U.S. information from existing and
future cyber threats.
congressional oversight
Question. In order to exercise legislative and oversight
responsibilities, it is important that this committee, its
subcommittees, and other appropriate committees of Congress receive
timely testimony, briefings, reports, records--including documents and
electronic communications, and other information from the executive
branch.
Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, and on request,
to appear and testify before this Committee, its subcommittees, and
other appropriate committees of Congress? Please answer with a simple
yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
provide this Committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate committees
of Congress, and their respective staffs such witnesses and briefers,
briefings, reports, records--including documents and electronic
communications, and other information, as may be requested of you, and
to do so in a timely manner? Please answer with a simple yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
consult with this Committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate
committees of Congress, and their respective staffs, regarding your
basis for any delay or denial in providing testimony, briefings,
reports, records--including documents and electronic communications,
and other information requested of you? Please answer with a simple yes
or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
keep this committee, its subcommittees, other appropriate committees of
Congress, and their respective staffs apprised of new information that
materially impacts the accuracy of testimony, briefings, reports,
records--including documents and electronic communications, and other
information you or your organization previously provided? Please answer
with a simple yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, and on
request, to provide this committee and its subcommittees with records
and other information within their oversight jurisdiction, even absent
a formal Committee request? Please answer with a simple yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
respond timely to letters to, and/or inquiries and other requests of
you or your organization from individual Senators who are members of
this committee? Please answer with a simple yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
Question. Do you agree, without qualification, if confirmed, to
ensure that you and other members of your organization protect from
retaliation any military member, Federal employee, or contractor
employee who testifies before, or communicates with this committee, its
subcommittees, and any other appropriate committee of Congress? Please
answer with a simple yes or no.
Answer. Yes.
[Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]
Questions Submitted by Senator Roger F. Wicker
axis of aggressors
1. Senator Wicker. Mr. Zimmerman, prioritizing our responses to
threats is sound policy, but we do not get to ignore threats just
because they are a lower priority. Russia, North Korea, and Iran are
nuclear armed, or aspiring, adversaries that maintain large
conventional armies. Most of our allies do not have nuclear weapons.
Allied defense spending is rapidly increasing, thanks to President
Trump, but still won't lead to sufficient capability to replace the
United States in the near-to mid-term. What role should the United
States play in deterring and defending against these threats?
Mr. Zimmerman. This is among the most pressing questions facing
U.S. defense policy. The United States and our allies face multiple,
serious threats requiring responsible and resolute approaches. In my
understanding, there is broad consensus that an urgent need exists for
our allies and partners to step up defense investments and take greater
ownership of their security needs--and that doing so would advance both
our interest and theirs. It is encouraging to see some allies and
partners moving in this direction, and a key role the United States can
play is to accelerate this trend and get more allies on board. If
confirmed, I would make this a priority from day one, using ASD(ISA)'s
role in managing defense relations to spur and steer allies toward
security investments that strengthen our alliances and enable them to
lead from the front.
In Europe, our NATO allies are in some cases expanding defense
investments, and it seems to me that the United States should encourage
their increased ability to field combat-credible forces and weapons
systems that enable them to be primary on conventional deterrence,
while the United States continues to provide critical and focused
support, including an extended nuclear deterrent.
My understanding is that a similar arrangement can and should be
pursued with respect to threats our East Asian allies face from
Pyongyang. I have worked in previous roles with our South Korean allies
on security issues, and I can testify to their capabilities.
Meanwhile, Iran continues to threaten U.S. interests and our allies
in the Middle East. The National Security Presidential Memorandum on
Iran signed on 4 February cogently outlines these threats, and I fully
support its maximum pressure directives. We have shared security
interests with allies and partners in the Middle East, and the United
States can play an effective integrating and enabling role in
protecting them--especially against threats emanating from Iran and
terrorist groups. The Abraham Accords afford a model of how the United
States can foster cooperation among allies and partners that helps
advance shared security interests.
These threats are grave and cannot be wished away. Sound U.S.
defense policy will always deal with the world the way it is, not the
way we wish it would be. I believe that with an appropriate sense of
urgency, the approaches briefly outlined here can be pursued in a way
that makes our alliances stronger and spurs much needed investments in
both U.S. and our allies' security.
8(a) contracts
2. Senator Wicker. Mr. Zimmerman, the Small Business Act (SBA) 8(a)
program, created by Congress, provides a contract vehicle through which
sole source and set aside contracts can be awarded to small businesses
owned by Alaska Native corporations, Community Development
Corporations, Indian tribes, and Native Hawaiian organizations. These
corporations are tied to political relationships, not racial
classifications. They also are some of our most efficient contractors,
earning stellar Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System
(CPARS) marks. Last many of these small businesses employ veterans at
rates far exceeding the national average, allowing our Nation's finest
to continue to serve after they take off the uniform. Will you commit
to me to work to preserve and strengthen 8(a) contracting for the
Department of the Defense?
Mr. Zimmerman. This is an area where I would like to become more
familiar, and if confirmed would commit to work with the Department,
your office, and Congress to strengthen the 8(a) program to the extent
to which it falls within the ASD(ISA) portfolio. I appreciate the
unique value brought to the DOD through programs like 8(a) that are
known for efficiency and high CPARS marks.
3. Senator Wicker. Mr. Zimmerman, I recently toured an SBA 8(a)
contracting operation and saw firsthand the value 8(a) brings to the
Federal customer in terms of cost and efficiency while delivering
mission-critical solutions that increase our national security and
warfighter readiness. 8(a) contracts represent the best ``bang for the
buck'' for taxpayers, giving contracting officers additional
flexibility while also maximizing efficiency by reducing red tape. Do
you see the value in increased efficiency in flexibility brought from
initiatives such as the 8(a) program?
Mr. Zimmerman. I appreciate the flexibility and efficiency which I
understand are offered through the 8(a) program. If confirmed, I will
work to ensure such programs continue to deliver cost-effective
solutions to the extent that they fall within the ASD(ISA) portfolio.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Dan Sullivan
4. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Zimmerman, rapid response capabilities are
essential to enable our warfighters to win on the battlefield. At the
same time, our defense contractors must rapidly respond to the needs of
our military to make the U.S. Military more lethal. Flexible and
efficient contracting through the SBA 8(a) program is one trusted way
to do this. Please explain how you will ensure that proven, dependable,
and cost-effective 8(a) programs remain in place and supported by the
Department of Defense.
Mr. Zimmerman. Rapid response capabilities are critical for our
warfighters, and if confirmed I would work to ensure the 8(a) program
continues to offer a valuable avenue for achieving this through
flexible, secure, and efficient contracting, to the extent it falls
within the ASD(ISA) portfolio.
alaska
5. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Zimmerman, on President Trump's first day
in office, he signed the Executive Order ``Unleashing Alaska's
Extraordinary Resource Potential.'' This sent a strong message to
Alaska, America, and the world, that unleashing Alaska's extraordinary
resources and jobs in a growing economy is one of his Administration's
top priorities. For years, I've worked toward the success of the Alaska
LNG project. Not only could Alaska LNG shipments provide our allies
with energy security, reaching them in 6 days without any strategic
choke points, but this pipeline crosses directly through some of our
most prominent military bases in my State, several of which have had
issues with supply. Now, purchase agreements and other ways to commit
to the project, beyond just the Department of Defense's (DOD) immediate
need, will help secure financing for the project quickly and at the
lowest cost in line with President Trump's America First Energy and
National Security agenda. Can I get your commitment to work with me on
the Alaska LNG (AKLNG) Project?
Mr. Zimmerman. As someone who has studied energy security and
particularly LNG for much of my career, I understand that energy
security is vital to national security and appreciate your longstanding
commitment to Alaskan LNG. If confirmed, I commit to working with my
colleagues across the Department of Defense and you to explore this
project's opportunities for the DOD and nation.
collaboration with israel
6. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Zimmerman, it is U.S. policy to maintain
and enhance Israel's qualitative military edge (QME)--effectively,
Israel's ability to defend itself, by itself, against any threat or
potential combination of threats. Given the continuing instability
among Israel's neighbors and the region overall, this U.S. commitment
is of utmost importance. Unfortunately, in the past year, some U.S.
arms sales and deliveries to Israel were delayed or withheld. If
confirmed, will you make ensuring Israel's QME is maintained a
priority?
Mr. Zimmerman. If confirmed, I will support the Administration's
priority to maintain Israel's QME. The Trump Administration, as I
understand, has already taken steps to lift all holds on U.S. arms
sales and deliveries to Israel that were held up during the Biden
Administration. Through bold action to take ownership of and
responsibility for its security, Israel has modeled behavior I think is
widely appropriate for our allies.
7. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Zimmerman, for more than 4 decades, Iran
has served as the primary source of instability and chaos in the Middle
East. Hamas would not have been able to carry out the attacks of
October 7 without Iran's support. In Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and
beyond, Iran has, and continues to, work against American interests.
Iran today could produce weapons-grade uranium for one nuclear weapon
in just a week and multiple bombs in under a month. Iranian petroleum
exports remain at or near levels not seen in more than 6 years,
providing funding for their terrorist activity. Do you agree Iran must
be prevented from obtaining a nuclear weapon?
Mr. Zimmerman. I agree with the President's stated policy, outlined
in the 4 February 2025 National Security Presidential Memorandum, that
Iran can never be allowed to have nuclear weapons.
8. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Zimmerman, in your view, what more should
the United States be doing to stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear
weapon?
Mr. Zimmerman. I understand that negotiations with Iran are
underway, and I trust the Administration to pursue an agreement that
secures U.S. interests and those of our allies, which the JCPOA never
did. In the meantime, I support the Administration's approach of
maximum pressure and willingness to keep all tools available to counter
Iranian aspirations to acquire nuclear weapons and other malign
behavior. It is the Department of Defense's role to ensure the
President is armed with the best possible military options, and if
confirmed I would work to ensure the President has these.
u.s. indo-pacific command
9. Senator Sullivan. Mr. Zimmerman, soft power is a critical tool
in the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM) area of responsibility not
only because it fills host nation investment needs that might otherwise
be filled by China, but also because it reinforces critical
infrastructure and deepens ties that would be critical in any future
conflict in the region. If confirmed, will you commit to reviewing cuts
to many of these programs and supporting beneficial development
projects in the Indo-Pacific?
Mr. Zimmerman. My understanding is that the Department continues to
prioritize competition with China as our pacing threat, and that the
fiscal year 2026 budget request reflects this by investing in cutting-
edge, combat-credible capabilities designed to deter China and maintain
our competitive edge in the Indo-Pacific, consistent with the
Administration's peace-through-strength policy. Regarding information
about specific programs and strategy in the Indo-Pacific, I would defer
to the Department's office of Indo-Pacific Security Affairs.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Ted Budd
foreign military sales
10. Senator Budd. Mr. Zimmerman, if confirmed, you will be charged
with oversight of security cooperation programs and foreign military
sales (FMS) programs across the Middle East, Europe and Africa. Where
do you see the biggest bottlenecks in the FMS process and, if
confirmed, will you commit to working with my office and the Department
of State to eliminate red tape from this process?
Mr. Zimmerman. If confirmed, I commit wholeheartedly to working
with the Department, your office, Congress, and the State Department to
do all possible from the ASD(ISA) position to enhance the transparency
and alacrity of the FMS process. As a nominee, I do not yet have
complete knowledge of the bottlenecks, but if confirmed would make a
priority of meeting with the relevant stakeholders within DOD, State,
and Congress to pursue a foreign defense sales system that enables more
effective and rapid cooperation between the United States and our
partners, consistent with the Administration's objectives.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Jack Reed
anti-houthi operations
11. Senator Reed. Mr. Zimmerman, in your opening statement you
assert that the regions included in the International Security Affairs
role ``must be addressed judiciously and in ways that fully support the
Department's primary goals of securing the Homeland and deterring
China.''
How does waging a military campaign against the Houthis, which has
required repositioning assets from U.S. Indo-Pacific Command
(INDOPACOM) and includes more than 1,000 strikes to date with no public
articulation of the measures of effectiveness, fit into the
Administration's primary goals of securing the Homeland and deterring
China?
Mr. Zimmerman. I do not have complete insight into the recent U.S.
campaign targeting the Houthis, but my understanding is that it was
intended to ensure U.S. freedom of navigation at one of the world's key
maritime chokepoints, the Bab al-Mandeb, including the U.S. Navy's
ability to move forces between strategic theaters such as U.S. European
Command (USEUCOM) and USINDOPACOM. I support the President's position
that the Houthis' attacks were unacceptable and had to end.
12. Senator Reed. Mr. Zimmerman, you have spent your career in the
intelligence field with a significant portion focused on the Middle
East. In your opinion, are the Houthis rational actors that can be
deterred?
Mr. Zimmerman. While I do not have full details regarding the
recent agreement, the Houthis' acceptance of U.S. demands and
commitment to stop attacking U.S. ships seem to suggest a strategic
calculus responsive to U.S. and partner force projection.
allies and partners
13. Senator Reed. Mr. Zimmerman, in our office call you spoke about
your role, if confirmed, in managing partner and ally relations and the
importance of trust in those relations. I am heartened to hear this
will be a priority and I share your view on the absolutely criticality
of strong alliances built on trust, respect, and predictability. In
your assessment, would a trade war with our allies that stifles
economic growth, increases costs, and drives countries away from
purchasing U.S. defense articles help or hurt your efforts to build
trust and strengthen alliances?
Mr. Zimmerman. In my view, the President has been unequivocal in
maintaining that strong, reciprocal relationships that foster mutual
economic vitality are in both our interests and those of our allies. On
the very day of my writing this answer, the White House announced a
major trade deal with the UK, exemplifying the kind of mutually
beneficial economic arrangements that, in my understanding, the
Administration aims to forge with any ally or partner willing to pursue
them. I anticipate that future such arrangements will serve to deepen
trust and help facilitate appropriate defense sales to key allies and
partners.
14. Senator Reed. Mr. Zimmerman, do you believe that such economic
barriers would have a negative impact NATO allies' capacity to invest
more in their national defense--a goal we all agree is important, and
which you described as urgent in your answers to the Committee's
advance policy questions?
Mr. Zimmerman. There is an urgent need for our NATO allies to
invest more in defense and take greater ownership of their security
needs. My understanding is that this objective involves at least two
major challenges: first, a lack of will among some allies to adequately
increase defense spending; and second, a lack of defense industrial
capacity, which limits what new capabilities and weapons our allies can
acquire. I applaud President Trump for even in his first term
identifying how important it would be for our NATO allies to boost
defense spending, which it seems some have begun to do with more
conviction. If confirmed, I would work diligently to encourage even
greater defense investment and responsibility from our allies.
foreign assistance
15. Senator Reed. Mr. Zimmerman, American security is advanced by
the development of stable nations that are making progress on social
development, economic growth, and good governance. Conversely, American
security is undermined by frail and failing nations where conditions
foster radicalism, produce refugees, spark insurgency, and provide safe
havens for terrorists, criminal gangs, and human traffickers. It is
clear that strategic development assistance is not charity--it is an
essential, modern tool of U.S. national security.
Mr. Zimmerman. This Administration's nearly blanket freeze on
foreign aid and dismantling of United States Agency for International
Development (USAID) will directly result in regional instability and is
fundamentally harming to our standing with allies and partners across
the globe. Our national defense strategy correctly identifies the
important asymmetric advantage our allies and partners provide us to
deter Chinese aggression and maintain global stability. Do you agree
that freezing foreign aid funding and cutting personnel endangers our
global strategic interests?
I have not had the appropriate briefings to equip me to provide the
informed answer this question deserves regarding how best to reform
U.S. foreign assistance. I support the Administration's efforts to
review and where necessary realign foreign assistance to promote the
interests of the American people and to ensure such programs further
our country's freedom and flourishing.
16. Senator Reed. Mr. Zimmerman, China is eager to fill the void we
are leaving. Do we risk ceding U.S. influence, including our position
as ``partner of choice'', by abandoning our allies and foreign aid
commitments?
Mr. Zimmerman. In my view, one of the most important duties of the
ASD(ISA) position is to counter China's attempts to expand its
influence, especially in Africa and the Middle East. If confirmed, I
would support Department efforts to review our international
engagements to ensure they are aligned with America's interests and our
strategic national security focus on countering China. This will afford
us opportunities to address China's attempts to undermine U.S.
interests on a revamped, durable basis. I would anticipate using my
role in managing defense relations to warn countries about the pitfalls
of partnering with China.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Jeanne Shaheen
u.s. force posture in syria
17. Senator Shaheen. Mr. Zimmerman, I am deeply concerned about our
lack of engagement in Syria--the Administration has already cut
essential assistance for chemical weapons monitoring, repatriation of
Al-Hol residents, and basic needs in the fragile country. Now, the
Administration is withdrawing our troops that have been critical to the
fight against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
ISIS, Russia, and Iran are all trying to establish themselves in
Syria right now--they would benefit from our force reductions at this
critical moment. How will the United States ensure the lasting defeat
of ISIS without a force presence in Syria?
Mr. Zimmerman. While my knowledge of the situation on the ground is
limited given that I am not in the position, my understanding is that
the Combined Joint Task Force Operation INHERENT RESOLVE is undertaking
a deliberate and conditions-based consolidation of forces in Syria, not
a withdrawal. This consolidation has been enabled by success in
suppressing remnants of ISIS in Syria, primarily through our vetted
Syrian partners the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) and the Syrian Free
Army, both of which I understand continue to maintain strong
counterterrorism pressure on ISIS. I also understand that the
consolidation does not remove our ability to support these partners
and, if needed, project power and strike ISIS and other Violent
Extremist Organizations.
I agree chemical weapons monitoring is a serious issue. I
understand that Syria's interim authorities are cooperating with the
Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. I also understand
that the fall of the Assad regime has created a pathway for thousands
of civilians to return to their communities from the Al-Hol camp, or to
be repatriated to countries such as Iraq through coordination between
the SDF, the interim authorities, and various humanitarian
organizations. Iran's influence in Syria has suffered from Assad's
fall, and the interim authorities do not appear willing for Iran to
regain a foothold.
18. Senator Shaheen. Mr. Zimmerman, if confirmed, what is your plan
to deal with the ISIS fighter population detained by the Syrian
Democratic Forces?
Mr. Zimmerman. My understanding is that the Department of Defense
retains authorities and capabilities to support detention operations in
Syria and assist in repatriations from northeast Syria. If confirmed, I
would anticipate helping the Department of Defense support Department
of State diplomatic efforts to persuade other countries to repatriate
their detained citizens from Syria, to include as appropriate using the
Counter Terrorism Train and Equip Fund to provide limited support to
repatriation operations. With the increased rate of Iraqi repatriations
from Syria--which represent a large portion of the detainees--it will
be important to ensure this population is not exploited by ISIS. I
understand that the SDF is also in negotiations with the Syrian interim
authorities for long-term plans on how to handle both Syrian detainees
in a future justice system as well as the detention of any remaining
international detainees that cannot be repatriated.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Elizabeth Warren
ethics
19. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, if you are confirmed, will you
commit not to seek any employment with or compensation from a defense
contractor, including through serving on a board, as a consultant, or
as a lobbyist, for 4 years after leaving DOD?
Mr. Zimmerman. If confirmed, I will abide by all laws and ethics
rules regarding post-government employment, which include restrictions
related to acceptance of compensation from defense contractors and
communicating back to the Federal Government on behalf of future
employers and clients.
20. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, if you are confirmed, will you
commit not to engage in any lobbying activities, including unregistered
``shadow'' or ``behind-the-scenes'' lobbying under the guise of
consulting or advising, focused on DOD or any of its components for 4
years after leaving DOD?
Mr. Zimmerman. See response to Question 19, above.
21. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, will you commit not to seek
employment, board membership with, or any other form of compensation
from a company that you regulated or otherwise interacted with while in
government, for at least 4 years after leaving office?
Mr. Zimmerman. See response to Question 19, above.
22. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, during your nomination process,
did anyone on the Trump campaign, transition team, or other closely
related entity approach you about your loyalty to President Trump?
Mr. Zimmerman. I fielded appropriate questions about my policy
views, but I was not approached about loyalty.
23. Senator Warren. Mr. Lohmeier, Mr. Overbaugh, and Mr. Zimmerman,
if you were approached about your loyalty to President Trump, did you
sign a loyalty pledge or other similar oath? If so, please provide a
copy of the text of that pledge or oath.
Mr. Zimmerman. Not applicable, see response to question #22.
24. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, if you were approached about
your loyalty to President Trump, did you make any verbal
representations of loyalty? If so, please describe this representation.
Mr. Zimmerman. Not applicable, see response to question #22.
25. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, in November 2024, the New York
Times and other news outlets reported that Boris Epshteyn, a top
adviser to President Trump, allegedly requested payment from
prospective political appointees to promote their candidacies for top
positions within the Administration. Did you discuss the possibility of
joining the Administration with Mr. Epshteyn at any time?
Mr. Zimmerman. No.
26. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, if you did discuss the
possibility of joining the Administration with Mr. Epshteyn, did Mr.
Epshteyn seek payment from you for promoting your candidacy for a
position within the Administration?
Mr. Zimmerman. No.
27. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, at any time, did lawyers for
President Trump or members of President Trump's team approach you
regarding Mr. Epshteyn and the allegations cited above? If so, please
describe the information that they provided you (including copies of
documents), what was discussed during any calls, and any other
information pertaining to this interaction.
Mr. Zimmerman. No.
28. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, were you in contact with Mr.
Elon Musk at any time during your nomination process? If so, please
describe the nature of those contacts.
Mr. Zimmerman. No.
29. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, was Mr. Musk present or involved
in any interviews you did related to your nomination? If so, please
describe the nature of his involvement.
Mr. Zimmerman. No.
30. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, was Mr. Musk involved in any way
with your nomination, including but not limited to directly or
indirectly contacting Senators regarding their position on your
nomination?
Mr. Zimmerman. No.
31. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, who was in the room or
participated in any of your interviews regarding your nomination?
Mr. Zimmerman. Throughout my interviews, I interacted with various
people from the Presidential Personnel Office and the DOD Landing Team.
32. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, if you own any stock or hold any
other interest in any defense industry contractors, will you divest it
to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest?
Mr. Zimmerman. If confirmed, I will abide by the Ethics Agreement I
signed on April 8, 2025, which has been provided to the Committee.
33. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, what do you consider the role of
the press in a democracy?
Mr. Zimmerman. A free press is critical to a free country, as
enshrined in the First Amendment.
34. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, do you think it would be an
appropriate use of taxpayer resources to ``dig up dirt'' on journalists
who investigate or criticize you, your office, or the Trump
administration?
Mr. Zimmerman. No.
35. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, will you commit not to
retaliate, including by denying access to government officials or
facilities, against news outlets or individual journalists who publish
articles that are critical of you, your office, your agency, or the
Trump administration?
Mr. Zimmerman. Yes.
36. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, have you requested, or has
anyone requested on your behalf, that any other person or third party
sign a nondisclosure, confidentiality, non-disparagement, or similar
agreement regarding your conduct in a personal or professional
capacity?
Mr. Zimmerman. No.
37. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, will you voluntarily release any
individual from any such agreements before this committee votes on your
nomination?
Mr. Zimmerman. Not applicable.
38. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, have you ever paid or promised
to pay, or has anyone paid or promised to pay on your behalf, an
individual as part of any non-disclosure, confidentiality, non-
disparagement, or similar agreement?
Mr. Zimmerman. No.
39. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, if the answer to the previous
question was yes, how much was promised, how much was paid, and what
were the circumstances?
Mr. Zimmerman. Not applicable.
40. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, will you commit to recuse
yourself from all particular matters involving your former clients and
employers for the duration of your service at DOD?
Mr. Zimmerman. If confirmed, I will abide by the Ethics Agreement I
signed on April 8, 2025, which has been provided to the Committee.
41. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, please provide a list of all
your clients at Tractor Air LLC within the last 5 years.
Mr. Zimmerman. This LLC has been inactive for the past 5 years with
zero clients.
congressional oversight and transparency
42. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, what is your understanding of
the role of the Department of Defense Inspector General and service
Inspectors General?
Mr. Zimmerman. My understanding is that the DOD Inspector General
acts as the principal advisor to the Secretary of Defense to combat
waste, fraud, and abuse at the Department, including by conducting
audits and investigations and communicating with Congress. My
understanding is that the services' Inspectors General perform similar
duties for the services.
43. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, will you ensure your staff
complies with any Inspector General deadlines established for requested
communications, documents, and witnesses, and that staff will be
protected from reprisal for their testimony?
Mr. Zimmerman. If confirmed, I would ensure both compliance with
Office of the Inspector General deadlines and protection of witnesses
against retaliation for testimony.
44. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, if you are not able to comply
with any Inspector General requests and deadlines, will you notify the
Republican and Democratic members of this committee regarding the basis
for any good faith delay or denial?
Mr. Zimmerman. If confirmed, I would work with the Office of the
Inspector General to comply with requests in a timely manner. I would
defer to that office to keep Congress updated regarding its reviews.
45. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, if you are confirmed, will you
commit to refusing to follow illegal orders from any individual,
including the President?
Mr. Zimmerman. I do not believe that the President or Secretary
would issue an unlawful order. If confirmed, I would consistently
follow the Constitution and laws of the United States.
46. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, what actions would you take if
you were given an illegal order from any individual, including the
President?
Mr. Zimmerman. I do not believe that the President or Secretary
would issue an unlawful order. If confirmed, I would not carry out an
unlawful order.
47. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, will you commit to voluntarily
provide a deposition if you are requested by Congress to provide one?
Mr. Zimmerman. I commit voluntarily to respond to congressional
requests with an appropriate deposition.
48. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, will you commit to voluntarily
testify in front of Congress if you are requested by Congress to do so?
Mr. Zimmerman. I commit voluntarily to respond to congressional
requests with appropriate testimony.
49. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, will you commit to testify or
provide a deposition in front of Congress if you are issued a subpoena
to do so?
Mr. Zimmerman. I commit to respond to subpoenas with the
appropriate testimony or deposition.
50. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, will you commit to providing
information or documents to Congress voluntarily if you are requested
to do so?
Mr. Zimmerman. I commit voluntarily to respond to congressional
requests with the appropriate information or documents.
51. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, will you provide information or
documents to Congress if you are issued a subpoena to do so?
Mr. Zimmerman. I commit to respond to subpoenas with the
appropriate information or documents.
52. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, will you commit to following
current precedent for responding to information requests, briefings,
and other inquiries from Congress, including the Senate and House Armed
Services Committees and their minority members?
Mr. Zimmerman. I commit to being responsive to all such requests
and inquiries, including from minority.
53. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, if confirmed, will you commit to
posting your official calendar monthly?
Mr. Zimmerman. If confirmed, I commit to complying with the Freedom
of Information Act, which I understand covers all agency records to
include my official calendar.
54. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, do you think the Federal
Government has an overclassification problem? If so, please provide
examples of overclassification you have encountered.
Mr. Zimmerman. Classified information is essential for national
security, yet I do believe overclassification presents a real problem.
Information that does not meet the standards for classification should
not be classified. If confirmed, I am committed to supporting the
Secretary in ensuring proper classification and, as needed, would work
with my intelligence community counterparts to ensure requirements and
timeframes for safeguarding national security information are
appropriate and not excessive.
55. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, if confirmed, do you think your
department should pursue strategic technology to support automated
declassification?
Mr. Zimmerman. If confirmed, I would support using technological
solutions to increase the speed, accuracy, and consistency of
declassification reviews.
project 2025
56. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, have you discussed Project 2025
with any officials associated with the Trump campaign, the Trump
transition team, or other members of the Trump administration? If so,
please explain what you discussed, when you discussed it, and with whom
you discussed it.
Mr. Zimmerman. No.
57. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, have you discussed Project 2025
with any officials associated with the Heritage Foundation? If so,
please explain what you discussed, when you discussed it, and with whom
you discussed it.
Mr. Zimmerman. No.
foreign influence
58. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, have you received any payment
from a foreign government or entity controlled by a foreign government
within the past 5 years?
Mr. Zimmerman. No.
59. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, have you communicated with any
foreign government or entity controlled by a foreign government within
the past 5 years?
Mr. Zimmerman. Yes, as part of my official duties as a fellow in
the Senate and previously in the Intelligence Community.
60. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, please disclose any
communications or payments you have had with representatives of any
foreign government or entity controlled by a foreign government within
the past 5 years and describe the nature of the communication.
Mr. Zimmerman. I have received no payment from a representative of
or entity controlled by a foreign government. Regarding communication,
I have had multiple engagements with representatives of foreign
governments (Ambassadors, embassy personnel, etc.) as part of my
official duties as a fellow in the Senate and previously in the
Intelligence Community.
impoundment control act
61. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, do you believe the Secretary of
Defense or the Secretary of Energy has the legal authority to block the
disbursement of funds appropriated by Congress?
Mr. Zimmerman. I believe the Secretary and every member of the
executive branch must follow the Constitution and the law related to
disbursing funds appropriated by Congress.
62. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, what is your understanding of
the Impoundment Control Act?
Mr. Zimmerman. My understanding of the 1974 Impoundment Control Act
is that it provides a framework for handling circumstances in which the
President seeks to defer or cancel execution of appropriated funds. I
commit, if confirmed, to execute my responsibilities in a manner
consistent with the Constitution and the law. My actions and advice on
this matter would be informed by the Administration's legal positions
and advice from the Department's General Counsel.
63. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, do you commit to complying with
the Impoundment Control Act?
Mr. Zimmerman. I commit, if confirmed, to execute my
responsibilities in a manner consistent with the Constitution and the
law. My actions and advice on this matter would be informed by the
Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
General Counsel.
64. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, do you commit to notifying the
Senate and House Armed Services Committees, including the majority and
minority, if you are asked not to comply with the Impoundment Control
Act or not to expend the money that Congress appropriates or
authorizes?
Mr. Zimmerman. I commit, if confirmed, to execute my
responsibilities in a manner consistent with the Constitution and the
law. My actions and advice on this matter would be informed by the
Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
General Counsel.
65. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, the Constitution's Spending
Clause (Art. I, Sec. 8, cl. 1) and Appropriations Clause (Art. I,
Sec. 9, cl. 7) give Congress, not the Executive, power of the purse.
The Supreme Court has unanimously upheld this power. Do you believe
that impoundments are constitutional?
Mr. Zimmerman. I commit, if confirmed, to execute my
responsibilities in a manner consistent with the Constitution and the
law. My actions and advice on this matter would be informed by the
Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
General Counsel.
66. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, the funding levels in
appropriations bills passed into law are not targets or ceilings;
instead, they are amounts the executive branch must spend, unless
stated otherwise. Congress could--if it wanted the President to have
discretion--write those amounts as ceilings. Do you agree?
Mr. Zimmerman. I commit, if confirmed, to execute my
responsibilities in a manner consistent with the Constitution and the
law. My actions and advice on this matter would be informed by the
Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
General Counsel.
67. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, what is your understanding of
the requirements for DOD to obligate funding that Congress authorizes
and appropriates, in accordance with the time period that Congress
deems it to do so?
Mr. Zimmerman. I commit, if confirmed, to execute my
responsibilities in a manner consistent with the Constitution and the
law. My actions and advice on this matter would be informed by the
Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
General Counsel.
68. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, do you commit to expending the
money that Congress appropriates and authorizes?
Mr. Zimmerman. I commit, if confirmed, to execute my
responsibilities in a manner consistent with the Constitution and the
law. My actions and advice on this matter would be informed by the
Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
General Counsel.
69. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, do you commit to following and
implementing every provision of the annual National Defense
Authorization Act passed into law?
Mr. Zimmerman. I commit, if confirmed, to execute my
responsibilities in a manner consistent with the Constitution and the
law, including the National Defense Authorization Act. My actions and
advice to the Secretary of Defense on this matter would be informed by
the Administration's legal positions and advice from the Department's
General Counsel.
70. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, if you became aware of a
potential violation of the Antideficiency Act, Impoundment Control Act,
or other appropriations laws, what steps would you take?
Mr. Zimmerman. If confirmed, I would abide by the Department's
procedures to report such violations to the appropriate authorities. My
actions and advice to the Secretary regarding any such violations would
be informed by the Administration's legal positions and advice from the
Department's General Counsel.
research and development
71. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, does the Federal Government
benefit from partnering with colleges, universities, nonprofits, and
federally funded research and development centers?
Mr. Zimmerman. The Federal Government can benefit from such
partnerships that are well-defined and cost-effective. The Federal
Government has collaborated with colleges, universities, nonprofits,
and federally funded research centers to use their advanced analytical,
engineering, and research capabilities and state-of-the-art facilities,
enhancing our Federal workforce and labs. In the context of the
Department of Defense, such collaborations can nurture the next
generation of scientists and engineers, equipping them with the skills
to tackle tough technical challenges and deliver advanced military
technologies to our warfighters.
72. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, under your leadership, will your
agencies continue to work with colleges, universities, nonprofits, and
federally funded research and development centers to research and
address our toughest national security challenges?
Mr. Zimmerman. If confirmed, to the extent they are applicable to
the ASD(ISA) portfolio, I will support partnerships that bring
enhancement to our warfighters and defense capabilities.
protecting classified information and federal records
73. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, what is your understanding of
the need to protect operational security, or OPSEC?
Mr. Zimmerman. Practicing proper OPSEC is critical to mission
success and force protection. OPSEC denies adversaries an opportunity
to gain advantage over U.S. forces.
74. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, what are the national security
risks of improperly disclosing classified information?
Mr. Zimmerman. The improper or unauthorized disclosure of
classified information risks causing identifiable or describable damage
to national security.'The scope and likelihood of that damage would
depend on the details of the information released, including the level
of classification, as well as the extent and nature of the disclosure.?
75. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, what would you do if you learned
an official had improperly disclosed classified information?
Mr. Zimmerman. I would follow the security protocols governing that
disclosure. If confirmed, I commit to adhering to the information and
security policies of the Department and will ensure all of those who
work for me do the same.
76. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, what is your understanding of
government officials' duties under the Federal Records Act?
Mr. Zimmerman. If confirmed, I will adhere to the Federal Records
Act and applicable DOD policies, which ensure that the Federal records
I create or receive are appropriately maintained.
77. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, should classified information be
shared on unclassified commercial systems?
Mr. Zimmerman. As per the DOD's Information Security Program, only
computers and IT systems approved and accredited for Classified
National Security Information may be used for classified
communications.
retaliation and protecting whistleblowers
78. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, do you believe that
servicemembers, civilians, grantees, and contractors should be
protected from any form of retaliation for coming forward about an
illegal order, sexual assault or harassment, negligence, misconduct, or
any other concern that they wish to raise?
Mr. Zimmerman. I believe that all whistleblowers should be
protected consistent with the law.
79. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, have you ever retaliated against
any individual for coming forward about an illegal order, sexual
assault or harassment, negligence, misconduct, or any other concern
that they wish to raise?
Mr. Zimmerman. No.
80. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, if you are confirmed, will you
commit to protecting whistleblowers? If so, please specify how you will
do so.
Mr. Zimmerman. Yes, if confirmed, I will commit to protecting
whistleblowers in accordance with applicable laws. As appropriate, I
would work with the General Counsel of the Department to ensure
compliance with these laws throughout the process.
81. Senator Warren. Mr.. Zimmerman, if you are confirmed, will you
commit to preventing retaliation against any individual for coming
forward about an illegal order, sexual assault or harassment,
negligence, misconduct, or any other concern that they wish to raise?
Mr. Zimmerman. Yes, if confirmed, I will commit to protecting
whistleblowers in accordance with applicable laws.
82. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, do you consider it to be
retaliation to demote an individual, prevent the promotion or
advancement of an individual, remove an individual from the military or
their role, or take other adverse actions related to personnel
decisions for an individual, in response to that individual engaging in
protected activity?
Mr. Zimmerman. My understanding is that each of those actions could
amount to an act of retaliation, depending on the circumstances.
83. Senator Warren. Mr. Zimmerman, do you consider it to be
retaliation to encourage another person(s) to demote an individual,
prevent the promotion or advancement of an individual, remove an
individual from the military or their role, or take other adverse
actions related to personnel decisions for an individual, in response
to that individual engaging in protected activity?
Mr. Zimmerman. My understanding is that each of those actions could
amount to an act of retaliation, depending on the circumstances.
__________
Questions Submitted by Senator Tammy Duckworth
politicization of the military
84. Senator Duckworth. Mr. Zimmerman, if confirmed, do you commit
not to retaliate against general officers or military servicemembers
for executing lawful policies enacted by a previous Administration?
Mr. Zimmerman. Yes.
strategic role of foreign aid
85. Senator Duckworth. Mr. Zimmerman, what is the role and value of
foreign aid in supporting military operations and regional stability,
particularly in Africa, the Middle East, and the Western Hemisphere?
Mr. Zimmerman. I have not had the briefings or access to provide an
informed assessment on the Administration's reform of foreign aid. I
believe that in some circumstances foreign aid can help reduce risk,
and I support efforts to ensure that such aid is tied to advancing
American interests, takes into account our highest-priority threats,
and aligns with our national security strategy.
86. Senator Duckworth. Mr. Zimmerman, how will you navigate
security cooperation with countries that may now turn to China for
critical aid due to cuts to U.S. foreign assistance, especially in
Africa?
Mr. Zimmerman. In my view, one of the most important duties of the
ASD(ISA) position is to counter China's attempts to expand its
influence, especially in Africa and the Middle East. If confirmed, I
would support Department efforts to review our international
engagements to ensure they are aligned with America's interests and our
strategic national security focus on countering China. This will afford
us opportunities to address China's attempts to undermine U.S.
interests on a revamped, durable basis. I would anticipate using my
role in managing defense relations to warn countries about the pitfalls
of partnering with China and motivate them toward mutually beneficial
collaboration with the United States.
military command structure
87. Senator Duckworth. Mr. Zimmerman, press reports indicate that
the Trump administration is considering plans to combine U.S. Africa
Command (AFRICOM) under U.S. European Command (EUCOM). If confirmed, do
you commit to consulting with this committee before recommending any
change to these two commands?
Mr. Zimmerman. I am not aware of a DOD plan to combine these
commands. If asked to weigh in on any such discussion, I would
carefully review all requirements, consult relevant stakeholders, and
engage with SASC as part of the process. My recommendations would be
guided by the Administration's America first, peace through strength
agenda.
88. Senator Duckworth. Mr. Zimmerman, do you have any concerns
about how this might impact U.S. strategic focus in Africa?
Mr. Zimmerman. I am not aware of a DOD plan to combine these
commands. I am not currently in a position to make a fully informed
analysis of the pros and cons of doing so.
89. Senator Duckworth. Mr. Zimmerman, press reports indicate that
the Trump administration is considering relinquishing the NATO Supreme
Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) position. If confirmed, do you commit
to consulting with this committee before recommending any change to
this construct?
Mr. Zimmerman. It is my understanding that the Department of
Defense is not considering relinquishing the SACEUR position at this
time. President Trump and Secretary Hegseth have both made clear that
the United States is not abandoning our European allies. I understand
that the Secretary is currently performing a review of U.S. global
force posture. If confirmed, I commit to provide my best advice to that
review and to engage in all appropriate consultation with SASC.
unauthorized disclosures
90. Senator Duckworth. Mr. Zimmerman, if confirmed, do you commit
that your deliberations and decisions will only be communicated through
official, secure channels and any decisions properly documented for
both oversight and institutional memory?
Mr. Zimmerman. Yes.
______
[The nomination reference of Mr. Daniel L. Zimmerman
follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The biographical sketch of Mr. Daniel L. Zimmerman, which
was transmitted to the Committee at the time the nomination was
referred, follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The Committee on Armed Services requires all individuals
nominated from civilian life by the President to positions
requiring the advice and consent of the Senate to complete a
form that details the biographical, financial, and other
information of the nominee. The form executed by Mr. Daniel L.
Zimmerman in connection with his nomination follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The nominee responded to Parts B-F of the committee
questionnaire. The text of the questionnaire is set forth in
the Appendix to this volume. The nominee's answers to Parts B-F
are contained in the committee's executive files.]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
______
[The nomination of Mr. Daniel L. Zimmerman was reported to
the Senate by Chairman Wicker on May 13, 2025, with the
recommendation that the nomination be confirmed. The nomination
was confirmed by the Senate on June 24, 2025.]
[all]