[Congressional Record Volume 171, Number 93 (Monday, June 2, 2025)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3160-S3161]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                      Nomination of Michael Duffey

  Mr. REED. Madam President, I rise today to urge my colleagues to 
carefully consider their vote for the nomination of Mr. Michael Duffey 
to be Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment.
  This position is unique in the Department of Defense. The Under 
Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment has a wide range 
of duties, including delivering on a timely basis cost-effective 
capabilities for the Armed Forces; supervising all elements of the 
defense acquisition enterprise and the defense industrial base; 
overseeing the modernization of our nuclear forces; and serving as a 
principal adviser to the Secretary on acquisition, sustainment, and 
core logistics. It requires a leader of the highest quality of 
judgment, expertise, and character.
  There is no question that President Trump has a right to choose who 
he wants in critical roles, but the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Acquisition and Sustainment should be someone

[[Page S3161]]

who is capable, without question, to meet the demands of the job and 
the expectations of those he will lead. They should have the experience 
and temperament to manage one of the most complex offices in the 
Department of Defense.
  Unfortunately, my view is that Mr. Duffey lacks experience leading 
any organization remotely as large and complex as the Department of 
Defense acquisition enterprise.
  For better or worse, the industry and the workforce that supports the 
Pentagon is enormous, complicated, and is a huge factor in our Nation's 
economy. Mismanaging it could harm taxpayers' investments, the American 
economy, and workers' lives. Do we want to risk hundreds of billions of 
dollars in acquisition programs to such a nominee?
  I have serious doubts about Mr. Duffey's ability to run this critical 
function of our government.
  Furthermore, in 2019, Mr. Duffey played a key role in the scandal 
that led to President Trump's first impeachment: withholding military 
aid from Ukraine to extort information on Mr. Trump's political 
opponents. While serving as a top official in the Office of Management 
and Budget, Mr. Duffey directed the Pentagon to withhold $250 million 
from the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative while Mr. Trump 
simultaneously demanded that President Zelenskyy hand over any 
information he had about Mr. Biden's family. Mr. Duffey's role in this 
outrageous event was brought to light during the impeachment 
proceedings. In my view, abusing the privilege of public office to 
exact political revenge is disqualifying.
  If confirmed, there are legitimate questions about Mr. Duffey's 
willingness to disregard the statutory directions of Congress.
  And, finally, Mr. Duffey coauthored a chapter for the Heritage 
Foundation's Project 2025 that suggested Federal procurement policy 
should be used to attack so-called woke policies in corporate America. 
It is not hard to imagine how Mr. Duffey could use his position as the 
head of the largest acquisition organization in the world to weaponize 
Federal funding against private corporations that he and President 
Trump disagree with politically.
  We have seen this played out in the context of universities. We have 
seen this played out in the context of going after funding that NIH 
provides to many universities, but, particularly, this all-out assault 
on people that the President perceives as being unfit or unsupportive 
of him, that directly translates to Mr. Duffey to not just esteemed 
universities throughout the country but our national defense--
corporations that, in fact, have embraced the idea of bringing us all 
together, getting the best possible person, moving them up. That would 
be an incredible disaster and failure for the Nation.
  And Mr. Duffey failed to alleviate any of these concerns during his 
Senate Armed Services Committee testimony.
  As I hope my colleagues know, my top priority has always been 
national security, and partisanship has no place in that mission. And I 
will always pick up the phone for whomever holds leadership positions 
in the Department of Defense, and I will seek opportunities to work 
with them to strengthen and support our military.
  Whomever they may be, I hope that they comport themselves with the 
wisdom, composure, and character--underlining ``character''--that this 
awesome responsibility demands. Our men and women in uniform and, 
indeed, the American people deserve nothing less.
  And the question I have is this: Is Mr. Duffey the best we have to 
offer?
  I do not believe so, and I urge my colleagues to vote against this 
nominee.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Ms. DUCKWORTH. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Scott of South Carolina). Without 
objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________