273
submitted 1 year ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

Adm. Lisa Franchetti, the Navy’s No. 2 officer, has been leading the service on an acting basis because of the impasse.

President Joe Biden’s nominee to be the Navy’s top officer, Adm. Lisa Franchetti, said it could take the service years to recover from the impacts of Sen. Tommy Tuberville‘s blockade of hundreds of senior military promotions.

Franchetti told the Senate Armed Services Committee during her confirmation hearing Thursday that the impasse has created “a lot of uncertainty” for Navy families.

“Just at the three-star level, it would take about three to four months just to move all the people around,” Franchetti said. “But it will take years to recover … from the promotion delays that we would see.”

More than 300 general and flag officer nominees have no clear path to confirmation over Tuberville’s objections, which he put in place over his opposition to the Pentagon’s policy that reimburses troops who need to travel to seek abortions and other reproductive care. The Pentagon is standing by the policy and Tuberville has vowed to continue his procedural hold, so there’s no end in sight to the standoff.

As the Navy’s current No. 2, Franchetti has been doing the top job on a temporary basis since Adm. Mike Gilday retired in August. The Army and Marine Corps are also being led by interim chiefs who are waiting to be confirmed.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), who quizzed Franchetti about the impact of the blockade, said the long-lasting effects create a “propaganda win for our enemies.”

“Our military experts project China wants to be able to take Taiwan by 2027, and we’ll still be trying to repair the damage inflicted by these holds,” Warren said.

“The Republicans’ failure to end this blockade makes it clear: they don’t care about our leaders,” she added. “They don’t care about the families who have served their country honorably for decades.”

Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) shot back at Warren’s comments, noting that the blockade would end if Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin simply repealed the abortion travel policy.

“One person. Secretary Austin, come on, do the right thing,” Cramer said.

Democrats, who’ve urged GOP leaders to talk Tuberville down from his tactics, estimate that nearly 90 percent of general and flag officers will be impacted by the hold between the over 600 officers requiring confirmation this year and other officers who will have to temporarily cover vacant jobs.

Confirming all the delayed promotions individually isn’t practical and would take hundreds of hours. But Republicans contend Majority Leader Chuck Schumer should at least hold one-off votes on members of the Joint Chiefs. The problem worsens at the beginning of next month, when Joint Chiefs Chair Gen. Mark Milley retires with no Senate-confirmed officer to take his place.

Franchetti also underscored the “uncertainty” the blockade had created for Navy families, who face delayed moves, issues with school enrollments and other problems.

“Our Navy families are dealing with a lot of uncertainty,” she said. “I have heard a lot of concerns from our families that they are having difficulty navigating that space right now.”

top 16 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] billiam0202@lemmy.world 47 points 1 year ago

Somehow, I don't think it would take years if the GOP win the Presidency and Senate in the near future. It's not like Trump got to nominate a full 25% of the federal bench because McConnell kept Obama from filling judicial vacancies.

[-] WagesOf@artemis.camp 22 points 1 year ago

More than half of his senate endorsed placements were acting appointments after acting appointment because none of them were even remotely qualified to do the jobs.

Trump will just let the whole military rot until even the lieutenants are acting posts.

[-] athos77@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago

No, they'll appoint their own right-wingers into place so that the next insurrection succeeds.

[-] Literati@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

The president can't just appoint whoever they want. Officer commissions have more oversight than say judicial appointments. They have to be approved by the Senate (eg this situation) and also have to meet requirements for the position/rank set out in regulation by congress. So a president could theoretically only promote the most conservative officers in the pool, but it's already a small pool.

Even so, as we see here, it only takes one senator to block promotions. This isn't even a fillibuster, the Senate passes this routine stuff through bulk unanimous consent.

[-] ech@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago

Nominating stooges and recovering from this bs are not quite the same thing. The former is more-so a continuation of said bs rather than a resolution of it.

[-] RaincoatsGeorge@lemmy.zip 41 points 1 year ago

Ah yes, win over evangelicals with your political grandstanding but alienate the entire U.S. armed forces. I’m not saying all of them are going to flip their votes as a result of this, but if I had to guess there’s more than a few that are furious by this charade. It only helps secure more votes to combat these fools.

[-] cobysev@lemmy.world 39 points 1 year ago

Recently retired US veteran here. When I joined the service in 2002, almost everyone I served with were die-hard Republicans. When I retired last summer, most of the people I served with were liberal Democrats.

Just in the past 2 decades since 9/11, we've watched as Republican politicians publicly flaunt support for us, while privately cutting all our pay and benefits and sending us off to die in countries we have no business being in.

The Republican party continues to claim that they support veterans and service members, but we know the actual truth. Democrats have done more for us than Republicans, and most of us are already voting Blue.

[-] raz0rf0x@pawb.social 24 points 1 year ago

I enlisted in 1998 while things were quiet. Clinton got us a nice raise back then. Then 9/11 happened and the military was inundated with right wing "patriots" reacting to events and looking to kill uppity brown people. I saw the quality of recruits diminish as the military lowered standards to surge troop strengths to engage in an illegal war. I recently met someone who was in my old unit only a few years ago and I didn't recognize the Marine Corps he described.

Personally, being ordered to partake in an illegal war in Iraq after having just left Afghanistan in an unresolved state only strengthened my liberal beliefs. Going to other parts of the world and seeing what politicians and superpower governments do to people, and the amount unnecessary pain and suffering that takes place at the hands of ideologues and dogma, should radicalize anybody against fascists and right wing ideology. People who see and experience all that and return even more hateful and bigoted are psychopaths.

I am proud of my service and my conduct in it, even if I don't agree with the missions I was on. I would do it all again. I loved being a Marine. The only people you'll find me hating are fascists and religious radicals. THAT'S who I learned to hate in the military because that is where most human suffering came from.

It surprises some people that I'm a liberal veteran. I tell them that you can't go through that and see all that and not be a liberal, not if you have a heart and brain.

And to anyone I piss off with this opinion: You're just telling on yourself.

[-] cobysev@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Then 9/11 happened and the military was inundated with right wing "patriots" reacting to events and looking to kill uppity brown people.

I signed up for the US Air Force literally a month before 9/11 happened, and I had to seriously reconsider what I was getting myself into when the Twin Towers fell. What was supposed to be a chill peacetime enlistment ended up being a potential start to WWIII (at least, that's what we thought when it happened).

I still went through with my enlistment, but I remember going to the MEPS that December and having one guy in my processing group who was joining the US Army. All he would talk about was how he couldn't wait to be issued his weapon and how many "towelheads" he was going to take down. He kept harassing the Marine in charge of our group, asking questions like how soon he'd get his weapon (before we're sent to Basic Training?) and how they tracked confirmed kills (has anyone gotten one before they finished Basic? Do we get to shoot terrorists as part of our training?)

No idea what happened to that dude, but I'm hoping he didn't make it far in his career.

[-] raz0rf0x@pawb.social 2 points 1 year ago

I don't know about Army because I've always hated how shitty soldiers tended to be. Mouthing off to Sargents and being generally undisciplined pigs. Couldn't even follow a joint battle plan for a joint patrol and nearly got my convoy wasted by friendly fire. But PRIOR to 9/11 people like you describe wouldn't have made it through Marine boot camp if they didn't stop acting like that. I doubt they would have made it through USAF or USN basic/boot either. But army... yeah, probably went in and got his ass shot off.

[-] PrincessLeiasCat@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 year ago

This is good to hear. An issue of big importance to me (and now thankfully a big name like Jon Stewart) is veterans’ healthcare & acknowledging the detrimental health effects and conditions caused by things like Agent Orange and burn pits.

The VA needs a lot of help, and for years as I have kept up with this, the GOP has been pulling stunts like this - political theater - that does actual harm to the military members and their families all the while demanding unquestioned patriotism. They wear a flag pin so they support the troops, of course.

And they get outraged when people, say, don’t stand up for the national anthem…but they never fail to vote for people like this. My dad was a disabled veteran, so got to spend years seeing him go through life in his debilitating condition as a result of being deployed into combat.

These people - who have never had to - chose not to - do any of this - support the people who do the most harm to veterans via these kinds of stunts, but then foam at the mouth the instant anyone doesn’t follow their “rules of patriotism”.

I know I’m preaching to the choir here, but it’s just so fucking revolting. Anyway, have a good one and o7.

[-] CPMSP@midwest.social 2 points 1 year ago

Thank you for your service.

[-] sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz 17 points 1 year ago

It's official, for those that have been trapped in darkness somewhere, Republicans hate law enforcement and the military. Strange days indeed.

[-] fubo@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Well, they also hate America -- the real America:

The America populated with immigrants,
The one still working on recovering from the moral catastrophes of racism,
The one that supports its international allies,
The one that reliably pays its debts, and thus is trusted as a standard of economic stability,
The one where people do honest work for honest pay,
The one where workers have the right to secure their share of economic gains through labor organization,
The one that's long been creating new and nontraditional lifestyles,
The one where medicine and science regularly make wonders accessible to everyone,

... you know, the one we actually live in, as opposed to some weird TV Land fantasy.

[-] Delusional@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

God damn we'll already never recover from what trump did during his presidency and now this as well. Republicans sure love making life miserable for as many people as possible.

this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2023
273 points (97.9% liked)

politics

19144 readers
5112 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS