Polarization Puts the U.S. Military at Risk

The United States military is arguably the most formidable in the world, utilizing an $817 billion budget and employing almost 1.3 million active service members. Why then, has a lone U.S. Senator been so detrimental to the day-to-day workings of the armed forces? Tommy Tuberville (R-AL) is the senior U.S. Senator from Alabama currently serving his first term in Congress. Although not a veteran himself, Tuberville has been quoted saying “there is no one more military than me” and has been appointed to serve on the Armed Services and Veterans Affairs Committee during his time in the Senate.  

Notably, Tuberville is staunchly opposed to abortion and has been very vocal about his distaste for Pentagon policies that allow leave and paid expenses for personnel who are unable to get an abortion in the state they are stationed in. In February, he began to block military personnel moves that required Senate confirmation in protest of these policies. These confirmations ensure that the high ranks of the U.S. military are properly staffed, as many of these confirmations are for personnel promotions that allow nominees to take the spots of officers who have retired, or simply be appointed to new command posts. Confirming each person individually would take 2–3 days, time that might be better spent arguing other political issues, so the Senate historically confirms the nominations in batches by unanimous consent, a procedure that does not require debates or voting. By objecting each time nominations are brought up, Tuberville ensures there is no unanimous consent, stalling the process. This issue has been exacerbated by Democrats, who have avoided confirming top leaders individually, both due to the lengthy nature of the process and because they want to avoid setting the precedent that Tuberville’s actions constitute an acceptable form of protest.  

Although Tuberville has allies within his party, he has also drawn the ire of some congressional Republicans including Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Todd Young (R-IN), and Dan Sullivan (R-AK), all of whom have been outspoken against the hold, and have repeatedly tried to convince Tuberville to change his mind. Nevertheless, Republicans have signed petitions forcing Democrats to hold votes on five key military personnel to fill positions on the Joint Chiefs of Staff and other high offices, all of which have easily passed and were necessary to ensure readiness within the armed forces. After all, these checks and balances are built into the American bureaucracy and undergird America’s success as a democratic state. Crucially, the president’s role as Commander in Chief and the Senate’s capacity to confirm appointments ensure that the military does not become an entity separate from the state, a divide that has at times led to military coups. This symbiotic relationship keeps Congress accountable for the military, with its responsibility for the creation of budgets, rules, and performance targets.  

It is worth considering the potential dangers that domestic polarization will have on the armed forces and their ability to operate in inevitably changing circumstances.

Tuberville’s one-man hold on confirmations has exposed the consequences of disrupting this relationship. The U.S. military is structured with strict command chains, and when they are interrupted, it becomes difficult to go about business in a normal way, weakening the combat readiness of U.S. forces. Tuberville says his hold will only be lifted when the Pentagon’s abortion policies are changed, something that looks highly unlikely within the near future. Many have criticized Tuberville for taking out his policy fight on the ideologically neutral military, rather than holding up Biden’s administrative nominations, as senators more typically do. It is worth noting that the Democrat-led Senate rules committee recently voted 9–7 on a temporary rule that would allow the Senate to confirm batches of nominations with a simple majority vote. However, the rule must get 60 votes on the floor to go into effect, a feat that seems unlikely given limited Republican support.  

If the U.S. entered a war tomorrow, Tuberville would hopefully recognize the broader significance of his actions and back down from his hold. In any case, his actions make clear the power individual senators can have given unique Senate rules, particularly over the U.S. armed forces. Many see China and the Indo-Pacific as the next potential flashpoint and threat to the U.S. military, and with the threat of escalation on the horizon, it is worth considering the potential dangers that domestic polarization will have on the armed forces and their ability to operate in inevitably changing circumstances. When any delay could mean compromising national security, Tommy Tuberville and America at large need to recognize that the military should be a unifying force, not a source of division, and that the mess of partisan politics is best kept separate from the United States Armed Forces.