Daniel Driscoll Confirmation Hearing

Roger Wicker (00:06):

Thank you very much. The Committee on Armed Services has convened this hearing to consider the pending nomination of Mr. Dan Driscoll to be the 26th Secretary of the Army. In support of Operation Iraqi Freedom, Mr. Driscoll served our country in Iraq, spending four years with the Army. So we thank him and the entire Driscoll family, his wife, Dr. Cassie Driscoll, and their two children, Daniel and Lila, who could not be with us today, for their willingness to serve this country again by accepting this new assignment. After his military service, Mr. Driscoll received his law degree from Yale and has worked in private equity and venture capital. All the while, he's retained many ties to his former service. The Army faces a complex array of challenges. Recruitment and retention improved last year, but the Army still has more than 10,000 fewer recruits than it did in 2023.

(01:14)
Since the beginning of the Biden administration, the service is down 36,000 soldiers. On top of that, the Army is not taking full advantage of opportunities to nurture interest in military service. Almost 300 high schools sit on a waiting list to get their own Army Junior Reserve Officer Training Corps unit. These units mean more than potential individual recruits. They represent communities where the Department of Defense can put down roots developing the army of leaders for tomorrow as well as excellent citizens for our entire society. As the service catches up on recruitment, it must also ensure that those who do enlist are equipped for the mission. The nature of large-scale combat operations is changing. The world sees this every week in Ukraine. To be ready for potential combat in the Western Pacific, the Army must expedite modernization efforts. On top of recruitment and modernization projects, the next Secretary of the Army must address this service member quality of life issues that afflict the largest service.

(02:23)
In fiscal year 2025 budget, the Army increased funding for barracks maintenance problems, but the effects of decades of neglect cannot be fixed overnight. The Army has a facility backlog of more than $100 billion. I offered an amendment which passed the most recent NDAA requiring all of the service to adopt a minimum annual facility sustainment levels. My colleagues and I need to see evidence that this change has been embraced within the service. I believe Mr. Driscoll's record, his Army service, his legal background and financial experience have prepared him to handle the myriad responsibilities of Army Secretary. If he's confirmed, Mr. Driscoll will face the challenges I've already outlined. He will be handed a budget that has not kept pace with inflation. He'll also take the helm at a time of increasing danger around the world.

(03:24)
The Army is playing a largely quiet but crucial role in the Western Pacific. It is deepening partnerships with our allies and partners in Southeast Asia. Meanwhile, the service is helping us maintain deterrence against the Chinese Communist Party, and it ensures that our South Korean allies are postured to prevent North Korean aggression. Soldiers from across the United States remain stationed in Europe. Their presence helps deter Russia and helps assure our NATO allies. In the Middle East, the Army continues to play a lead role in combating Iranian aggression. Clearly, the Army's work has been instrumental in these theaters. It must choose to remain relevant in today's complex threat environment. The Army should accelerate its transformation efforts and focus on new portions of the defense industrial base. It should expand its work on small unmanned aerial systems, or UAS, and counter UAS. And I say that even as I recognize and appreciate the Chief of Staff of the Army's focus in this area.

(04:35)
In the Western Pacific theater, the Army's contribution to sensing and shooting remains in its infancy. The service has the chance to realize its key logistics role for the joint force in contested areas, but it can do so with significant investment and focus. So I look forward to this hearing on how Mr. Driscoll will work to change the culture around the issues I have listed as well as other pressing matters. And I now recognize my friend, the ranking member of the committee, Senator Jack Reed for any opening remarks he may offer.

Jack Reed (05:12):

Thank you. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. Before I begin, I want to take a moment to express my profound sorrow for those involved in the crash at National Airport last evening. This is a tragedy beyond words and my thought to [inaudible 00:05:27] families of those on board, both aircraft as well as the entire Army community. And I'm grateful to the hundreds of brave first responders who worked throughout the night, and this committee will do everything we can to assist. And I thank the Chairman for recognizing it with a moment of silence. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Driscoll, welcome to this morning's hearing. And we were expecting to see Cassie and Daniel and Lila, but they're working or otherwise occupied. But give them our greeting, please. Let me take this opportunity to also to thank you for your military service. Mr. Driscoll is a third-generation soldier. He follows his father who served in the infantry and during Vietnam and his grandfather who was a decoder during World War II.

(06:12)
The committee is grateful to your family's military service and for your willingness to continue serving your country. Mr. Driscoll, if confirmed as the Secretary of the Army, you will oversee the manning, training and equipping functions of the United States Army. This is no small task. The Army is in the midst of a generational modernization effort, currently overhauling many of its major weapon systems. Simultaneously, the Army is seeking to transform the structure and organization of its brigade combat teams equipping them with cutting-edge technology in order to be more mobile and lethal. The service is experimenting with rapidly evolving technology such as unmanned systems, drone defenses and communications technologies among others. However, the Army continues to face a multi-year trend of flat budgets, which has forced Army leaders to fund the highest priority programs by reducing procurement of modern capabilities. For the smaller and more continental-based force, maintaining readiness must be one of your top priorities.

(07:16)
The Army has continuous deployment requirements around the globe to include supporting Ukraine against Russia's invasion, defending our interest and allies in the Middle East and maintaining a forward presence in the Indo-Pacific. I am concerned that the administration's orders to significantly increase military support to domestic law enforcement, particularly on the Southwest border, will harm the Army's readiness. This is a role for DHS, and I am a consistent supporter of a big increase in DHS budget in the appropriations process as part of a bipartisan border bill. That is the way to address the border. In my personal engagement with commanders at all levels, they have made clear that fully readying their formations requires extensive time, training and opportunities to innovate, and border missions will not build these war-fighting skills. Mr. Driscoll, I'd like to know how would you plan to ensure soldiers' time, training and capabilities are not spent on the border, rather on readiness issues?

(08:20)
Of course, the Army's success ultimately depends on its soldiers and civilians. Recently, the Army has been challenged to meet recruiting goals. The Army has worked hard to improve its recruiting activities and has enjoyed success with new programs like the Future Soldier Preparatory course, but it should continue to improve efforts to reach all who are willing and qualified to serve. Mr. Driscoll, in your advanced policy questions, you state your intention to quote, "Review the Army recruiting strategy to ensure it effectively conveys a strong value proposition to young people across the nation." In addition to the Army's strategy, I'm concerned that comments from the Secretary of Defense about women in combat and the President's executive order banning transgender troops may have a chilling effect on recruiting, and I'm interested in your thoughts on this issue. During our meeting earlier this month, we discussed the importance of maintaining a professional and apolitical Army.

(09:15)
I'm also concerned by reports that the administration may implement a so-called warrior boards to screen senior military officers for supposed unfitness to lead. This raises the chilling possibility that the administration may fire officers who are deemed to have the wrong political views or who have served effectively in military assignments that are disagreeable to President Trump. In fact, we've already seen this happen with Admiral Linda Fagan who was unceremoniously fired from a position as a Commandant of the Coast Guard, and I'm troubled that this firing was not based on her performance. Furthermore, I'm alarmed that this week, Secretary Hegseth has stripped retired Army General Mark Milley, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and former Chief of Staff of the Army, of the protective security detail that he had because of credible security threats from Iran and revoked General Milley's security clearance. Secretary Hegseth has also directed the Defense Department's acting Inspector General, acting because the Inspector General was fired Monday, to look into the facts and circumstances surrounding General Milley's conduct, so the Secretary may determine whether it's appropriate to reopen his military-grade review determination.

(10:29)
President Trump seems to be fulfilling his longtime threat to fire military leaders as a political loyalty test. I would point out however that our service members swear an oath to the Constitution rather than a party or a leader. This is what makes our Army the finest in the world. Mr. Driscoll, I'm interested in your views on military officers obligation to provide their best military advice, even if that advice contradicts the views of a political appointee. I would also like to hear your thoughts on how military officers can be expected to provide their best military advice if they are subject to loyalty screens or purge boards and whether you think removing members of the military for their views or positions will have a chilling effect within the military ranks. Mr. Driscoll, you face complex challenges, and it will require all of your skill. Thank you for your willingness to continue your service and lead the Army at this very critical time, and I look forward to your testimony. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Roger Wicker (11:23):

Thank you very much, Senator Reed. Before Mr. Driscoll makes his opening remarks, he will be introduced by two of our distinguished colleagues, first Senator Mullin and then Senator Blumenthal. Senator Mullin, you are recognized.

Markwayne Mullin (11:41):

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I will say you guys are much more intimidating from this side. I don't think I've ever really been intimidated by y'all until I'm looking at you now, so this is really scary. Hey, I am so privileged and pleased to be able to introduce my good friend, Dan Driscoll. We've got to know each other, and it's been quite an honor because I will say right off the bat, what you see is what you get. I think everybody sitting up here has had the opportunity to sit down personally with him, and his personality, no matter what we were dealing with, no matter what pressure was facing us, was the same personality you received 24/7. I don't care if I was talking to him at 3:00 in the morning, 4:00 in the morning, 5:00 in the morning or at 11:00 at night, which we did multiple times, he always had this same type of personality, which is exactly what we need in our Army today.

(12:37)
We need consistency. We need a leader that are war fighters and those that are supporting our war fighters can rally behind. We need someone that brings positive attention to the real challenges that the Army is facing. And as been pointed out by our Ranking Member Reed, he's also a third generation in the family that has served proudly and honorably in the Army and currently has a nephew that's stationed in Korea. He's heavily invested in it, and so I want to go through and read what he's accomplished because it honestly makes me sometimes feel intimidated by sitting aside him when you start thinking about it. First of all, he graduated in three years in UNC Chapel Hill with the highest distinction. I'm still trying to figure out how to graduate from college. Used his 9/11 GI Bill to attend Yale Law School, worked at Yale's Veteran Legal Service Clinic. He ran for the US House of Representatives in North Carolina 11 district in 2020.

(13:51)
He lost, but I want to show that he was willing to serve, and when that happened, it just got him more involved in public service. He didn't go away. He still stayed involved, which sometimes defeat shows the biggest character. And that's when we first started getting to know each other, and his character shined true in that. He wasn't upset, he wasn't bitter, and we all know individuals that's lost elections that get very bitter. Instead, he dug down and still wanted to know how he could be involved in public service. It spoke highly of his character. He worked at the 100watt investment firm, was chief operating officer at a $200 million venture capital fund, a member of the North Carolina State Bar Rotary Club VFW Post 1137 and the IAVA.

(14:37)
Just to go through some of the stuff he did in the military, basic service training at Fort Jackson, OCS commissioned to US Army as an armor officer, completed Army Ranger School, stationed at Fort Drum New York with the 10th Mountain Light Infantry Division as a Cavalry Scout Platoon Leader, deployed in 2009 to Baghdad, Iraq in support of Operation Freedom, earned the rank of first lieutenant. Awards include the Army Accommodation Medal, Combat Action Badge, Ranger Tab, National Defense Service Medal, Iraq Campaign Medal and a Campaign Star, Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, Army Service Ribbon and Overseas Service Ribbon. I think the things if you ask him that he's most proud about is his wife and his two kids though. His personal life is something that guides him each day, and I know this personally because we've had deep conversations about our family and about how we balance the work life and how it can be done.

(15:38)
We've had conversations about how you center your life and make sure your priorities are right because I believe wholeheartedly if your priorities are straight with God, family and everything else, that everything else you'll be highly successful at. And this is why Dan has been highly successful in everything that he's put his hands upon. For us to have someone like himself that's willing to step away from his family for a short period of time because you all know the challenges that he's going to face, to be willing to still serve when he doesn't have to is exactly what we need. We need a selfless server that's going to be willing to take on the task of the United States Army. And as Secretary of Army, we've got a winner here. So I really hope that all my colleagues, that this could possibly be a unanimous support of someone that's exactly what the United States needs today. With that, I'll yield back.

Roger Wicker (16:26):

Thank you very much, Senator Mullin. Senator Blumenthal, I don't know about you, but I didn't know until this morning that Senator Mullin could be intimidated, so this is a revelation to us. You're now recognized.

Richard Blumenthal (16:40):

Thanks, Mr. Chairman. And I join Senator Mullin in observing how impressive this panel looks from this vantage point. More impressive without us being up there, I may say. I want to join my colleagues in expressing my deep heartbreak at the tragic loss on American Airlines Flight 5342 and the soldiers lost on PAT25. And my heart goes out to the families, especially of the servicemen who were lost. My heart breaks for their loved ones, and I want to thank the first responders for swiftly delivering their critical assistance at the scene. And as we await further updates, I hope that we will all pledge to redouble our efforts to ensure that the federal agencies that make the nation's skies safe, the FAA, the NTSB, the DOT and others, have the tools, the funding, the resources, support from Congress to prevent future tragedies like this one. We all fly in and out of that airport, and I must say I often look out the window, as perhaps you do, with planes taking off and landing and wondering how this dangerous dance is done safely day in and day out.

(18:11)
But we have to invest in the technology as well as the people to make it safe. I have the great honor to introduce Dan Driscoll, and I want to thank his family, his wife Cassie, son Daniel and daughter Lila. We all know that families serve along with public officials, especially in our military and Department of Defense. I join the Chairman and the Ranking Member in observing that the Army stands at a pivotal juncture. Ongoing global conflicts and nascent threats demand that the Army remains the strongest, best fighting land force in the world, and that we assure that they never have a fair fight, that they always have superiority in every space and sphere. This nomination comes at a time when leadership and accountability in the Department of Defense require the highest standards of integrity, judgment and capability. The next Secretary of the Army will be faced with training and equipping that land force in a way that reflects our nation's values and commitments.

(19:25)
Now, this introduction is personal for me. As many of you know, Dan Driscoll was a classmate of the vice president at Yale Law School, also my alma mater. He came to know, at Yale Law School, Jake Sullivan, who has just finished serving as National Security Advisor for President Biden, and Matt Blumenthal, my son, who is a United States Marine Corps veteran of Afghanistan. Once Dan's nomination became public, I quickly heard from both Jake and Matt. Both shared stories of their friendship with Dan and recounted his strong intellect, his powerful work ethic and his willingness to find solutions to difficult problems based on the facts, whatever those solutions might be. As a lawyer, we follow the facts and the law, and that's what Dan Driscoll will do as Secretary of the Army. And they assured me that he's a person willing to listen, to learn and to work in a bipartisan way to put our soldiers first.

(20:41)
I'm confident that his prior service in the Army will serve him well, and he will remember that the Army's strength comes, not just from its technological prowess, but from the Americans who proudly wear the uniform he once wore. I spoke to Dan a number of times in the course of his preparing for his appearance here today, and those conversations convinced me that he is willing to work on the basis of collegiality, be transparent and open with this panel, with the Congress and our colleagues. And I welcome this opportunity to introduce him perhaps as a sign of, not just the collegiality, but the bipartisanship that has characterized this committee so clearly and consistently. So I'm proud to introduce him today, and I hope that my colleagues will ask him tough questions because he's indicated to me that he is, not only confident in his ability to serve, but also in his ability to learn and do it with an open mind and a willingness to listen to members of this committee when we have views that he has to hear. I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield the floor.

Roger Wicker (22:16):

Thank you, Senator Blumenthal, and to both Senator Blumenthal and Senator Mullin, I don't want either of you to feel anxious. So if you'd like to return to your seats up here, you may do so. Mr. Driscoll, you are now recognized for your opening statement. We appreciate you being here.

Dan Driscoll (22:45):

Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Reed, distinguished members of the committee, good morning. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today as the nominee to serve as the Secretary of the United States Army. It is an honor to be considered for this role. To Senator Mullin and Senator Blumenthal, I'm sincerely thankful for the introductions, and I'm deeply grateful for the trust and confidence placed in me by President Trump. Our thoughts and prayers go out to all involved in last night's tragedy which occurred a few miles away from this hearing room. If confirmed, I commit to working with this committee to ensure that this never happens again. Returning to my prepared remarks, I'd like to begin by acknowledging my family who couldn't join me here today because of the rescheduled hearing but I know are watching.

(23:28)
To my wife Cassie, who manages to keep us afloat despite being an accomplished surgeon, and children, Daniel and Lila, it is your unwavering support that has made my service possible, and I'll be forever grateful. I also want to thank the men and women of the United States Army past and present, whose courage and dedication inspire all of us every day. My commitment to this role is rooted in my family's long lineage of military service. My grandfather served in the Army during World War II as a decoder. My father served as an infantryman in Vietnam. I served as a cavalry scout in Operation Iraqi Freedom. And as much as you can trust the plans of an eight-year-old, my son Daniel plans to join too. We are a family that is grateful to have had the privilege of wearing the uniform of the United States Army. We are a family that understands the gravity of leading soldiers in and out of combat. We are a family that has chosen for generations to serve alongside our brothers and sisters in arms.

(24:22)
I joined the Army as a middle-class public school kid from the mounts of North Carolina. The values and experiences I gained through military service molded me into the man I am today, and they opened up ways for opportunities I scarcely could have imagined when I enlisted. In my experience, the transformative power of military service is open to those who are willing to shoulder the task. During my time in the Army, I was fortunate to serve and deploy to combat alongside soldiers who represent the very best of America. The American soldiers' professionalism, ingenuity and dedication are unmatched. Whether in garrison at Fort Drum New York, on the training grounds of Yuma, Arizona or in the battlefield in Baghdad, Iraq, I saw firsthand the immense sacrifices that they and their families make to uphold the freedoms we hold dear.

(25:09)
The world is changing rapidly, and we must ensure the Army's prepared to operate in new, complex and contested environments. From advancing our capabilities in multi-domain operations to cutting-edge technologies, my sacred duty to our Army is to ensure our soldiers have the world's finest training, equipment and leadership to accomplish any mission and to be as lethal of force as it can be. If confirmed, I intend to be the soldiers' Secretary of the Army. This is why I believe President Trump has nominated me. America's soldiers and their families will be my mission. Lastly, I recognize the importance of working closely with Congress and in particular, with this committee. Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Reed and members of the committee, it's the honor of my life to be given the opportunity to earn your trust and continue my service to our great nation. I look forward to responding to your questions and discussing how we can work together to support the soldiers, civilians and families who make up the United States Army. Thank you.

Roger Wicker (26:06):

Thank you very much, Mr. Driscoll. And before I begin my questions, there are a few routine questions which we ask all civilian nominees that appear before this committee, so if you would answer these questions. Have you adhered to applicable laws and regulations governing conflicts of interest?

Speaker 1 (26:26):

Yes.

Roger Wicker (26:26):

Have you assumed any duties or taken any actions that would appear to presume the outcome of the confirmation process?

Speaker 1 (26:34):

No.

Roger Wicker (26:35):

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?

Speaker 1 (26:57):

Yes.

Roger Wicker (26:58):

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 the requester regarding the basis for any good faith delay or denial in providing such records?

Speaker 1 (27:16):

Yes.

Roger Wicker (27:17):

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?

Speaker 1 (27:30):

Yes.

Roger Wicker (27:30):

Will you cooperate in providing witnesses and briefers and response to congressional requests?

Speaker 1 (27:36):

Yes.

Roger Wicker (27:37):

And will those witnesses and briefers be protected from reprisal for their testimony or briefings?

Speaker 1 (27:44):

Yes.

Roger Wicker (27:45):

Thank you very, very much. Let me begin then my line of questioning by getting back to something I mentioned in my opening statement, and that's Junior ROTC. This committee is serious about building Junior ROTC. It is a matter of scholarly study that Junior ROTC, whether Army or the other branches, is a citizenship builder. Students who volunteer for Junior ROTC, and they only take volunteers, they have better attendance records, they have higher graduation records, they attend post-secondary education at a higher rate, and in general, they're better students. And this is without question based on peer-reviewed studies. We increased the minimum number of Junior ROTC units by 200 in our legislation, yet there are today only 15 more units across the DOD than there were two years ago.

(29:08)
Now, as chairman of this committee, and I think I speak for the committee, we intend for the statute to be followed. And this is not a ceiling that we've created. It's a floor. And we intend for the Department of Defense and the Department of the Army to follow the statute as passed by the House and Senate and signed by the President of the United States. And so it troubles me that only 15 units across the country have actually been opened in spite of our statute. Meanwhile, there are 300 schools around the country that are on a waiting list. If you ask a principal, any principal in any state of the Union, would they like a Junior ROTC, they say yes. If you ask the school board or the superintendent, they say, "We would love to have a Junior ROTC." This is a winner. The data are clear and a RAND Corporation study supports us. So Mr. Driscoll, if confirmed, how would you plan to improve the situation that I've described and to reduce the Army Junior ROTC waiting list?

Dan Driscoll (30:33):

Senator, I appreciate the question, and thank you for taking the time in your office to dive into this with me. This is actually a personal issue. My nephew, who's now stationed in Korea, did JROTC in Lexington, Virginia. It was one of the most powerful experiences in his life, and I think that this is a topic that requires focus from the top. And I commit, if confirmed, to looking at this, working with the team because these are the kind of lineages and relationships and chains that we can build into communities that can get us, not just one future soldier, but get us generations of soldiers. And so I would love to work with your office, if confirmed.

Roger Wicker (31:09):

And even those who don't go into military service are better citizens. So I appreciate that. So how are we going to tackle the overall issue of Army recruiting?

Dan Driscoll (31:22):

I think we have an incredible opportunity this year, Senator. It's the 250th anniversary of the Army. The Army has an incredible history that can be told of the men and women that have served and the amazing deeds they've done both in and out of uniform. This year, we can take that momentum and build a backlog and a pipeline of soldiers that can hopefully fill up for the next couple of years. The Army has been actually taking some reasonably good steps, it seems from the outside. The Future Soldier Corps out of Fort Jackson that has been helping with ASVAB prep and a lot of the physical fitness prep seems to be working.

(31:57)
If confirmed, I would want to look and see if that can be scaled even further. There are a lot of technology tools that have been integrated into the recruiting process. Some of them have had great benefits. Some of them like digitizing young people's medical records have had unintended consequences where now we're starting to find all sorts of things we wouldn't have been able to see before. I think we need to take a deep dive on what are those unintended consequences to some of the things we're doing and try to create pathways and mechanisms for more waivers or whatever it is to continue to strengthen the Army's recruiting pipeline.

Roger Wicker (32:32):

I agree with that. Thank you very much. Senator Reed, you are recognized.

Jack Reed (32:36):

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And Mr. Driscoll, you bring integrity, intelligence and the experience as a young officer leading soldiers, which is the greatest privilege an American can have. So thank you for that. In one of your advanced policy questions, you said that the current promotion system does not necessarily select senior officers for their institutional knowledge or strategic acumen, which are increasingly desirable. Could you elaborate on that?

Dan Driscoll (33:08):

Senator, I think contrasting my experience in the military with my experience in the private sector, the private sector does recruiting a little bit differently where it's often the best woman or a man for the job. Time in a specific role is less correlated with promotion, and there are all sorts of things that would be a larger mosaic of traits that you would look at. I think the Army could take a similar view of promotion and mechanize it.

Jack Reed (33:36):

And so how would you describe the current sort of metric for promotion in the Army? My assumption is that it's principally based on performance and merit.

Dan Driscoll (33:48):

Senator, my understanding is that is a component of it with a heavy weighting toward time in service or time in your role.

Jack Reed (33:56):

Now, will you look at this promotion system with the idea

Jack Reed (34:00):

… You're making appropriate changes.

Dan Driscoll (34:02):

Yes, Senator.

Jack Reed (34:03):

Thank you. In the acquisition process we have, as you suggest in your answers, barriers to doing business from your perspective and particularly those in the 1980s that were designed to ensure fair competition. Could you generally describe these barriers and what you think you can do to eliminate them?

Dan Driscoll (34:28):

Senator, I think the first thing we need to do is improve the Army as a customer. The current model the Army uses to acquire things rewards entities that are enormous. The big five primes are the case study in who can currently survive such a hard relationship with a customer. The Army's ability to project what it's going to need in the future limits the ability for companies to build up the infrastructure to provide that support and to price things knowing how long the Army will remain in its life. I think that a hard focus on improving the Army's ability to project what it needs and empowering the defense base to expand from, call it, five to seven to 25 to 50 would be powerful first steps.

Jack Reed (35:18):

One of the issues that you'll face is the apparent increased deployments to the border for immigration activities. Back in June of 2020 before the Appropriations Committee, General Hokanson, who's the previous commander of the National Guard said, and I'll quote, "As I've expressed within the building as well, there is no military training value for what we do. This is a law enforcement mission under the Department of Homeland Security." And he also emphasizes stress on families of such missions. So what is your assessment of the training value and consequently the readiness status of the forces?

Dan Driscoll (36:03):

Senator, I think border security is national security. We have had soldiers at the border for a number of years. I think the Army stands ready to execute on any mission from the President of the United States and Secretary of Defense up to and including helping to secure our border.

Jack Reed (36:19):

But is there a cost in terms of readiness, readiness to conduct military operations against a military opponent, not an immigrant?

Dan Driscoll (36:30):

I think the Army has a long 249-year history, Senator, of balancing multiple objectives and if this is important to our commander-in-chief, the army will execute on it.

Jack Reed (36:46):

I guess the question would be how do you account then for General Hokanson's observation after serving as the Commander of the National Guard and looking closely at many National Guard deployments?

Dan Driscoll (37:00):

I think, Senator, the burden borne by our National Guard is something when I was in, when we deployed, the stress on their families is incredible. They were doing many deployments back to back, they have to manage jobs outside of their military roles. I think it adds a stress level that a lot of times is forgotten or just set aside by leaders. My commitment to this committee is if confirmed, I would want to, anytime we work with National Guard, make sure we are considering and taking into account this stress on their jobs back home and on their families.

Jack Reed (37:36):

Well, thank you very, very much Mr. Driscoll and thank you for your family's service.

Roger Wicker (37:40):

Thank you, Senator Reed. Senator Fischer?

Deb Fischer (37:42):

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and welcome, Mr. Driscoll. It's good to see you, thank you for your service and really the sacrifice, service, commitment of your family as well. The last several years from the war in Ukraine and the US response to Iranian and Houthi attacks in the Middle East, it really has demonstrated just how quickly munitions are expended in modern conflicts. If confirmed, will you commit to reviewing our current stockpile requirements for army munitions to ensure our stockpiles are right-sized for modern conflicts, especially for potential conflicts that would last more than a few weeks?

Dan Driscoll (38:26):

Absolutely, Senator, and this is a topic that you and I have talked about. I think what we have learned in Ukraine and with some of the other conflicts is it's no longer sufficient to build up a munition supply, put it on the shelf over 20 years and hope that we guessed the right amount that we or our allies or our friends would need. We have got to have an industrial base that is able to scale with us. I thank the committee for this work on 155 munitions and getting it going again, but we have to do more, and if confirmed, I would want to work with this committee and your office, Senator, to do a deep dive on this.

Deb Fischer (38:59):

Since the Cold War, we've, I think, seen this pattern of feast and famine. When there's conflict, the first couple years we boost up production and then we let it slide and I don't believe we can continue to have that kind of pattern there. You said you'd work with Congress, that you'd work with the committee on that. Just what do you think, off the top of your head since we had the discussion, what do you believe is a path forward that you would suggest to this committee? And do we have the necessary resources available to be able to accomplish that currently, do you think?

Dan Driscoll (39:49):

Senator, to the resource question, I would need to take a deeper dive once briefed if confirmed to what we could do. I think the United States has an incredible history of agile and innovative manufacturing. It has decayed as a nation over the last couple of decades, but it's still there. The American people will be with us if we include them. I think if you look at the private sector and the innovation loop, we do have some case studies of being able to create things with soldiers, having coders with them in the field and actually updating products and getting it back to the manufacturing floor with a much tighter innovation loop. I think we can do that working together and it could make an incredible difference.

Deb Fischer (40:30):

Do we have the authorities to be able to accomplish that now or do you think that you would need more authority to be able to move us quickly forward?

Dan Driscoll (40:40):

I think we do have the authorities, Senator.

Deb Fischer (40:42):

Thank you. Mr. Driscoll, small drones and the UAS, they're undoubtedly going to play a key role in future conflicts, but where do you see opportunities to expand the Army's use of those drones and unmanned systems?

Dan Driscoll (41:00):

I think, Senator, and it was incredibly great talking to you about this, it has changed how warfare has fought. When I did armor school, the way we have designed much of our equipment, our tanks in particular, our tanks are built to receive fire from the front or indirect fire from the top, they are not built to receive it from the rear or the back corners. So there are soft spots all over our tanks, which are some of our most dependable fighting machines that very cheap drones rigged with very cheap explosives can exploit, and I think we saw this with the Russian invasion in Ukraine that a lot of the way that we have thought about how to fight will have to change because of drones, both large and small with swarm.s we can no longer shoot $4 million missiles to take down a $400 drone, that just simple math doesn't add up. We are going to have to find solutions, whether it's directed energy or whatever it is, that can have a cost-effective way to provide security.

Deb Fischer (41:59):

You answered my second part of the question on how we're going to make sure it is cost-effective because right now it is not. Okay, recruiting. We see tremendous challenges with recruiting in the Army across all services. What is your current assessment right now of the Army's recruiting challenges and how would you address them?

Dan Driscoll (42:25):

My sense is for the last three or four years, we have missed our goals. I believe even the goals we hit from the outside, it seems as if the Army lowered their goals. The best analogy that I heard is the Army threw the dart at the dartboard and then drew the bullseye around where the dart landed. That's not a great way to staff an army. We have the fewest number of active-duty soldiers that we have had since World War II right now, conflict is erupting around the world.

(42:51)
I think there is a story to tell of the United States Army that young people want to hear and I think we have complicated that story a bit over the last couple of years. I actually don't think it is throwing more money at the problem. I think it's nice to get things like the GI Bill, I got to use the GI bill but I didn't enlist for that, I enlisted because I wanted to go serve my country and I think young people stand by ready for us to tell that story again in a compelling way. And if confirmed, I look forward to working with you to tell that story.

Deb Fischer (43:19):

Thank you, I look forward to working with you.

Dan Driscoll (43:21):

Thank you, Senator Fischer. Senator Shaheen?

Jeanne Shaheen (43:25):

Mr. Driscoll, congratulations on your nomination, thank you for your past service and for the willingness of you and your family to continue to serve this country. I want to start by expressing my condolences as the chair and ranking member on the loss of lives last night, those members of the military who were lost as well as everyone lost in that air tragedy. And according to the Army's fiscal year 2024 accident or mishap assessment that was just released this month, 2024 had the most class A flight mishap rates per 100,000 hours since 2007. So what will your strategy be to try and keep training flights out of harm's way?

Dan Driscoll (44:14):

Senator, to echo your remarks, it is an absolute tragedy. I think I've seen the same thing I believe you are on television, so it's an accident that seems to be preventable from what we can tell today, that should not happen. I think a focus from the top-down on a culture of safety. There are appropriate times to take risk and there are inappropriate times to take risk. I don't know the details around this one, but after doing it, if confirmed, and working with this committee to figure out the facts, I think we might need to look at where is an appropriate time to take training risk and it may not be near an airport like Reagan.

Jeanne Shaheen (44:53):

Well, thank you. As I'm sure you know, historically the Secretary of the Army has unique homeland defense responsibilities and it's especially critical in times of crises. So at the direction of the Army Secretary, you could direct that the National Guard be available to coordinate with civilian authorities on airspace. Is this something that you will be willing to consider and to work with civilian authorities?

Dan Driscoll (45:21):

Absolutely, Senator.

Jeanne Shaheen (45:23):

Thank you. I want to follow up on your conversation with Senator Fischer because, as you know, most of the capabilities that we've provided to Ukraine come from army stock or army programs, Abrams tanks, anti-air and anti-armor weapons, long-range strike and guided multiple rocket launchers. And the National Security Supplemental that Congress passed last year is providing real relief to the US industrial base, including in New Hampshire where we have a significant defense industrial base. If confirmed, will you ensure that Army stockpiles can meet our national security requirements and will you include in your budget and supplemental requests to Congress enough funding to replenish the defense industrial base?

Dan Driscoll (46:10):

Senator, as I told your colleague, I think this is one of the great problems facing our time in getting our munition and getting our magazines back up to where they need to be. I think we need to use this moment to figure out how do we create sustainable scalable solutions so that if in the future we need to tap back into those stockpiles, how do we get them to scale even faster? And so I commit to working with your office to both get us to where we need to be to replace what we've used in Ukraine or to what we've had our friends using in Ukraine, but then also to get lessons learned from that that we can record so that we are ready to go if we need to for a threat like China.

Jeanne Shaheen (46:54):

Well, thank you. One of the things we talked about when we met in my office was some of the challenges, those exact challenges. One of the companies I mentioned was L3 and their development of ENVG-Bs, the night vision goggles that have been so important to the army. You talked about improving the Army's ability to project what it needs over the long term. One of the challenges that we've had with the ENVG-Bs is that the Army budget requests have been up and down over the years, they've not been consistent despite positive feedback from our war fighters. So how will we commit to dealing with that kind of budget inconsistency and how will you address it? What kinds of things, strategies are you thinking to address it?

Dan Driscoll (47:41):

Senator, I think this is the perfect kind of topic where, if confirmed, working with this committee to find solutions for funding. This is a problem that includes a lot of different parties and I think a level of transparency and inclusion and planning will be helpful. As the Army does things like IVAS, it may be expanding away from some of the previous technologies that it used. I think we have to keep our eye on what has worked in the past and keep a hybrid of maintaining and refurbishing some of the old technologies to kind of smooth out the transition to the new ones and I look forward to working with your office on these kinds of topics if confirmed.

Jeanne Shaheen (48:21):

Well, thank you very much. As you point out, we're not going to be able to replenish the stockpiles that we're losing if we don't have a strategy for how to deal with this long-term and ensure that our companies that are so critical to that replenishment are engaged in that conversation. So thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Roger Wicker (48:43):

Thank you for that excellent point, Senator Shaheen. Senator Sullivan?

Dan Sullivan (48:48):

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Driscoll, congratulations, appreciated our meeting. I look forward to supporting you in spite of your Yale law degree, which I think generally is disqualifying, but I'll overlook that this time.

(49:07)
10 years ago I was in this position, I was a brand new US Senator, been here for a month, and the Obama administration announced as part of its gutting of our US military they were going to cut 40,000 active-duty Army troops including the 425 at J Bear in Alaska, the only airborne brigade combat team in the entire Indo-Pacific, strategic national security suicide in my view. And I was a brand new Senator, I fought that with everything I had, I put a hold on the Chief of Staff of the Army's confirmation, I put a hold on the Secretary of the Army's confirmation for several weeks until we got the army to see the light, okay? Obama ended up cutting 35,000 troops and he kept the 425 in Alaska, 5,000 airborne.

(50:05)
One was a report, an idea from a report from 2021 that would deactivate four striker brigade combat teams, six infantry brigade combat teams, two national guard aviation brigades, more than 10% of the Army's active-duty combat power. If this idea ever saw its head in the Pentagon from a non-Senate-confirmed DAS, I need your commitment to me and this committee right now that you would kill it.

Dan Driscoll (50:44):

Senator, I commit if confirmed to fight as hard as I can for the Army. As I said to your colleague, the Army is at its lowest staffing since World War II.

Dan Sullivan (50:51):

Right, and do you think cutting 12 brigade combat teams worth of combat power is a good idea?

Dan Driscoll (50:59):

Without knowing the specifics Senator, no.

Dan Sullivan (51:02):

Well, come on. Just I need your answer to say no.

Dan Driscoll (51:03):

No.

Dan Sullivan (51:03):

Do you think cutting 12 brigade combats… This is Obama 2.0, right? Do you think cutting 12 brigade combat teams from the army would implement President Trump and Secretary Hegseth's policies of peace through strength?

Dan Driscoll (51:21):

No.

Dan Sullivan (51:21):

No it wouldn't. Do you think it would deter Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin if this idea, and maybe this idea has been discarded by this DAS who's there right now, cutting 12 brigade combat teams would help with deterrence?

Dan Driscoll (51:38):

No.

Dan Sullivan (51:39):

I don't think so either. Well, thank you on that because very disturbing when I read that and I'm glad you agree with me that we're not doing Obama 2.0, we're doing Reagan and Trump 2.0, peace through strength and ideas of gutting the Army's act of duty force, that's what I fought when I came here. And if there's anyone who's trying to do that, we'll fight it, I'll fight it.

(52:07)
Okay, let me go to another question. In addition to the 11th Airborne Division in Alaska, we have the 49th Missile Defense Battalion at Fort Greeley. A lot of people don't know this, but the cornerstone of missile defense for America is in Alaska and it's led by the US Army. The president put out his Iron Dome Executive Order recently for layered missile defense, I fully support that. Will you work with me and this committee, Senator Kramer, we're going to be introducing legislation to bolster what the President's trying to do, but a lot of it will involve the Army, a lot of people don't know that. The 49th Missile Defense Battalion at Fort Greeley, they like to call themselves the 300 protecting the 300 million because they protect the whole country, will you commit to working with this committee and me on bolstering our missile defenses, particularly as it relates to Fort Greeley and our brave soldiers who are doing a great job defending our nation and come to Alaska with me to see them in the 11th Airborne Division?

Dan Driscoll (53:19):

It would be an honor, Senator. As we talked about in your office, I was stationed with 10th Mountain Division in Fort Drum, New York.

Dan Sullivan (53:25):

Where there's no mountains.

Dan Driscoll (53:26):

When you get there you assume 10th Mountain Division would have mountains around and I think the highest elevation on the entire base is 50 feet. So I would be honored, Senator.

Roger Wicker (53:34):

Great, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Driscoll.

Dan Driscoll (53:36):

Thank you very much.

Roger Wicker (53:38):

Senator Warren?

Elizabeth Warren (53:40):

Thank you Mr. Chairman. Congratulations on your nomination, Mr. Driscoll. So what I'd like to do is continue the conversation that we started in my office. The Army buys a lot of stuff from tanks to helicopters, they buy a lot of stuff from big defense contractors. But those giant companies often sneak restrictions into the contracts. They hog up the software rights or the technical data all to prevent service members from being able to repair their own equipment.

(54:17)
So today I'd like to talk through an example so we can see the difference it makes when the Army isn't hamstrung by right-to-repair restrictions. Last year the Army needed a new cover for a safety clip, but the contractor told the Army they couldn't have it for months and the safety clips would cost $20 a pop. Now thankfully, the Army had managed to keep right-to-repair restrictions out of this contract and was able to 3D print the part in less than an hour for a total cost of 16 cents. Now, Mr. Driscoll, does being able to get the parts we need in hours, maybe minutes instead of months, and for nickels instead of dollars, help US readiness and national security?

Dan Driscoll (55:16):

Unequivocally, Senator.

Elizabeth Warren (55:18):

Good. When right-to-repair restrictions are in place, it's bigger profits for giant defense contractors, but also higher prices for DoD and longer wait times for service members who need to get their equipment repaired so they're ready to go. Chairman Wicker has an Acquisition Reform Agenda which calls for a complete review of data rights across the Department of Defense, I think that is exactly right because it would help put the army fully in command of the equipment that it has paid. So Mr. Driscoll, let me ask you, if confirmed, will you work with this committee to identify more opportunities where the Army can save money and time by making their own parts and fixing their own equipment?

Dan Driscoll (56:13):

If confirmed, unequivocally, Senator.

Elizabeth Warren (56:16):

Would you like to expand on that at all?

Dan Driscoll (56:18):

This type of innovation that is happening in the private sector at scale in a lot of ways seems to have not trickled into the Army as much. And if we think about engagement with a peer like China, being able to repair our parts in areas around the world will be crucial to that. And if we are having six-month delays in CONUS and paying 100x the rate, that is not scalable in an actual conflict. And so I'm totally supportive, Senator.

Elizabeth Warren (56:43):

Good.

Roger Wicker (56:44):

That was a very good answer, Mr. Driscoll.

Elizabeth Warren (56:46):

It was an excellent answer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Right-to-repair restrictions have truly gotten out of control and they threaten our national security. In some cases, the Army can't even write its own training manual without a sign-off from the contractor. My Service Member Right-to-Repair Act would help fix this problem. But a root cause of this defense contractor profiteering is the revolving door between senior Pentagon officials and big defense contractors. Last year I released a report that found 700 instances of top-20 DoD contractors hiring former high-ranking officials. Do you think this is a problem, Mr. Driscoll?

Dan Driscoll (57:35):

I do, Senator.

Elizabeth Warren (57:37):

When government officials cash in on their public service by lobbying, advising, or serving as board members and executives for the companies that they used to regulate, it undermines public officials integrity and it casts doubt on the fairness of government contracting, and it costs DoD a lot of money. We owe it to our taxpayers and we owe it to our men and women in uniform to fix this broken system. I look forward to working with you on this, Mr. Driscoll.

Dan Driscoll (58:11):

Thank you, Senator.

Elizabeth Warren (58:12):

Thank you, I yield back.

Roger Wicker (58:14):

Thank you, Senator Warren. Senator Cramer?

Kevin Cramer (58:17):

Thank you, Chairman, and Senator Reed and thank you Mr. Driscoll for your service and your willingness to step in the gap again in this important position.

(58:27)
I am going to first of all, thanks for all your answers to the previous questions, particularly on acquisition reform. It's a high priority for the Chairman, it's a high priority for all of us. And quite honestly, I worry less about witnesses' answers to questions and promises that come from people at the Pentagon than I do the culture. To me, that's the big thing that all the policies in the world, in fact, I appreciated you answering earlier to the question that I think it was Senator Fischer asked when you said you have some of the authorities already that you need. We just have to go faster. And the Army does it quite well by the way, but just know that I'm on the encouragement side. Go faster, as I've said from this roster many, many times to witnesses.

(59:17)
If people go faster and innovate more and encourage innovation, particularly from smaller companies, I promise not to be the person that sits up here and says, "I got you," when something bad happens, but I promise you I'll be your worst nightmare if you fail to go fast because you're worried about your backside and some DoD lawyer or leader that doesn't have the guts to do what needs to be done to keep up with the pace of China. Having said all that, great answers.

(59:47)
So I'm going to go a whole different direction and talk to you about the US Army Corps of Engineers. A number of us, including the Chairman, Senator Sullivan, and at least the three of us and maybe a couple of others up here, are also on the Environment and Public Works Committee so we have jurisdiction over the Corps of Engineers in two committees. In the last Congress in the Water Resources Development Act, WRDA, that was signed into law December of 2022, I authored some bipartisan language with Senator Merkley requiring the Army Corps to establish the Western Water Cooperative Committee. Now, the Corps hates advisory committees, but this was a committee of Western states at the encouragement of Western states, every governor from Washington state to California to the Dakotas and in between supported it, and every attorney general, in other words a pretty diverse group of leaders in this country, supported this Western Water Cooperative Committee. And it was to be implemented no later than 90 days after enactment.

(01:00:58)
So here we are more than two years later, after it's been authorized and fully funded, it still has not been stood up. Now, that's not your fault, but Senator Merkley and I sent the Corps a letter in October of last year asking for an update. After a whole bunch of back and forth leading up to this hearing, I finally got a little bit of clarity the other day on the process, process by the way is a word I'm growing to hate, process is what DoD officials use to kill good people and good ideas, just my opinion, thanks for listening. But I finally have a bit of clarity on the process and what the Army's working through.

(01:01:40)
So yesterday I was told that the committee's charter currently sits before the DoD's Advisory Committee Management Office really and will be approved within 30 days. It's a law, it's been approved by the only people that matter, the people in Congress and the President of the United States. So 30 days to approve something that they're required to do by law seems a little outrageous to me, but I'm going to be generous today. After that "30 days", which we'll see, I'll believe it when I see it, it goes back to the Army for action, okay? Now that doesn't give me a lot of solace because I have history. Again, it's a law, it has been a law for over two years.

(01:02:31)
Now I know you're not in your role yet, Mr. Driscoll and I didn't plan on using my time on this topic necessarily, but my colleagues have done a great job on the priorities of the day, can I get your commitment that it doesn't have to take 30 days to get something going that's been the law for over two years? The DoD officials who don't like this idea have just tried to kill by stalling. Do I have your commitment to get to it and get it done in quick order?

Dan Driscoll (01:02:59):

Unequivocally, Senator. And just to highlight, I hope it's illustrative and I would hold myself accountable to this next statement, having two of your colleagues here from each side, I intend to, if confirmed, work with this committee and follow the law. And so I would absolutely commit to looking into that.

Kevin Cramer (01:03:18):

Thank you. I yield.

Roger Wicker (01:03:20):

Senator Kramer, thank you for your question, which is well taken and applies to the issue that I rose about the increased floor of junior ROTC units, for which there are 300 applications and only 15 have been created in response to a statute passed by the Congress and signed by the President of the United States. Senator Kaine, you are next.

Tim Kaine (01:03:49):

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Driscoll, congratulations on your nomination. Thanks to all my colleagues who offered thoughts about the crash, the three soldiers from Belvoir, we don't have their identities yet, but that is something I know the Army family feels and this region feels, all my colleagues do actually, because all my colleagues have staffers who work in this area and we're all kind of awaiting with dread the manifest and the passenger list of those who died.

(01:04:21)
Here's a topic that this committee has really grappled with, and I will say that none of us are happy with it in a bipartisan basis, and that is the efforts of our DoD to figure out strategies to counter UAS incursions into our bases. A well-publicized one occurred at the Langley base in Hampton, Virginia, but there've been other sightings, New Jersey and other bases have been subject to these. Langley as an example, the incursions occurred over a period of 17 days in December of 2023 and we're 14 months later and we still have not been given good answers about what in fact happened. And I think we're really frustrated by this because if it was just a one-day thing, well maybe you couldn't track it, couldn't figure it out, but if it happened for 17 days and we still don't have answers, that's problematic.

(01:05:13)
And the reason I raised this with you, Mr. Driscoll, is that the Army has been tasked with being the DoD's executive agent on this topic. All the stakeholders are at the table, but the Army is tasked with being the lead in countering small UASs. The Army is charged with leading and directing relevant doctrine requirements, material training standards and capabilities to establish joint solutions, not just Army solutions, but joint solutions for addressing current and future emerging small UAS threats. Should you be confirmed, what will you do to ensure coordination between the services in developing a joint counter small UAS doctrine?

Dan Driscoll (01:05:55):

Senator, I think these drone incursions highlight kind of a core problem with how we have thought of our nation's defense. We haven't thought about it in a while. And I got to speak with your colleague kind of in-depth about this specific incursion and it seems to be the buck falls between a lot of different agencies and no one is empowered to act quickly. And that is at scale even when it continues to show up day after day, night after night. And I think a lot of the first steps are building a network of communication and identifying an SOP for how do you engage with these things? Who owns what? Who's calling and what is a acceptable timeframe for this kind of communication to occur? That would just be the people side of the thing.

(01:06:38)
And then from a technology side, I think if you look at a lot of the tools like directed energy, we need to empower our agencies to protect our homeland from these types of incursions so that we can shoot them down and learn from specifically who sent it, what was it doing, what was it collecting? My understanding of this situation in particular is we just don't know. Assets are going to have to be able to get further and faster with lower signature than they do today. That being said, if you look at FARA, the push for the Army, it is early in its development, is incredibly expensive and we are likely going to have to work with the Blackhawks and the Chinix and the assets that we have today. And so if confirmed, I would want to get briefed on this and do a deep dive with the team to figure out how are we going to position ourselves and what training do we need for the next one day to five years until we can get to a better state?

Tommy Tuberville (01:07:33):

Thank you. I want to discuss an issue that affects many of our installations, including mine in Huntsville Redstone Arsenal. The issue is military construction, MilCon, as we know it, we need to move fast and the traditional military construction process is far too slow. Back at Redstone Arsenal, there are two warehouses as we speak are being constructed, one for military by the Corps Engineers and one by the FBI. These warehouses

Tommy Tuberville (01:08:00):

Houses are roughly the same size, regarding to the size, but the FBI has got a huge amount of bells and whistles more than the military warehouse. The military warehouse is going to cost almost $56 million and it's going to take 48 months, four years, to build this, where the FBI facility is going to cost $40 million and take only basically a year and a half. We got a problem. How on the earth does this make any sense? The Army is currently running a repair-by-replacement pilot program that is being tested at a couple of installations to demolish older barracks and replace them with new modern facilities. The key part of this program is that it is using operations and maintenance dollars versus traditional MILCON dollars. Are you familiar with this?

Dan Driscoll (01:08:56):

Senator, I had the opportunity to talk with you about it in your office. This is the type of thing that makes my blood boil on behalf of soldiers. The army has a limited budget to begin with, we have to be good stewards of the American taxpayers' dollars, and when we are not, it is both the taxpayer and the soldier, and these soldiers are my friends. It is my friends that live in these barracks and raise their families there, and we need to stretch these dollars as far as we can.

Tommy Tuberville (01:09:22):

And the other small point I want to bring up, we talked about recruiting, I won't get into that. The new recruit in the Army makes $25,000 a year before taxes. We just gave a raise, but we can't expect to attract the best and the brightest young men and women in the military unless we do something else, we got to continue. I know we give them a lot of perks at the end of the day, but we have got to understand $25,000, I mean, most of them can make that in a two-month's time in some kind of big tech or whatever. So just keep that in mind as you get into recruiting, we have got to start taking care of these young men and women if we're going to build the fighting force that we need. Thank you.

Dan Driscoll (01:10:07):

Yes Senator.

Roger Wicker (01:10:11):

Thank you, Senator Tuberville. Senator Slotkin.

Sen. Slotkin (01:10:15):

Sorry, apologies. I'm not used to going anything but last, chairman, so shocked me. Thank you for being here and congratulations on your nomination, as I said when we met. And I was glad to hear so many people talking about the collision that happened last night, you will have an important role in that investigation if confirmed. And it does sound like it's a training mission, but it's just important that we lead a thorough process, people across the country are mourning watching that and everyone on this panel here flies in and out of there. I mean, it's hard not to think about it, so thank you for your attention to that.

(01:10:57)
I think the thing we talked about in my office is I am a Democrat who won on the same ballot as Donald Trump, I absolutely understand that Donald Trump has the right to nominate his own people, put forward his own policies. I've seen that now in many transitions, Democrat and Republican. But the thing that I keep coming back to is the core constitutional responsibility. You will swear an oath to the Constitution, not to any one president. Many of us have worked alongside or in the military for a long time and care deeply about it remaining apolitical. And we're seeing now active-duty military army being sent to the border, being sent on missions right now to support DHS, but according to our constitution, the US military active duty cannot perform law enforcement roles. When you were trained in the military, were you trained on basic law enforcement techniques?

Dan Driscoll (01:12:03):

I was not, Senator.

Sen. Slotkin (01:12:04):

And can we agree that searching a building in Iraq or Afghanistan when you're in a combat zone as an army officer is fundamentally different than performing those kinds of search and activities inside the United States with American citizens?

Dan Driscoll (01:12:20):

Senator, this isn't meant to be evasive, I've been trained on it, and so I couldn't answer what would be different about it from my training.

Sen. Slotkin (01:12:26):

Yeah, I think the issue is not just the Constitution, although that should be enough. I'm deeply concerned that active-duty troops are going to be forced into law enforcement roles, and we're already hearing stories that really, really touch right on the line. They're not properly trained. There's going to be an incident, someone's going to get hurt, there's going to be some sort of blow-up, and suddenly we're going to have a community deeply, deeply angry at uniformed military who were just told to go and drive those DHS vehicles, clear that building, perform support to something. So I have to ask you again that if the US was asked, active duty, was asked to do something that contravenes the constitution, can you say clearly that you will push back on anyone, whether it's the Secretary of Defense or the Commander-in-Chief, and stand up on behalf of the Army instead of just doing whatever you're told?

Dan Driscoll (01:13:29):

Just to answer the beginning part of the question, Senator, I reject the premise that the president or Secretary of Defense would ask for an order like that.

Sen. Slotkin (01:13:35):

Fine.

Dan Driscoll (01:13:36):

But I will always follow the law.

Sen. Slotkin (01:13:37):

Okay. I mean, your predecessor, secretary of the Army, secretary Esper, had this exact thing that he wrote about in his book, 82nd Airborne, Army, was asked to come in and clean up peaceful protests in Washington D.C. So I reject your rejection that this is theoretical, that this is hypothetical. It's not. And a nominee and confirmed secretary under Trump, I know they've removed his portrait, but I just have to say this is not a hypothetical. So we're counting on you to protect the integrity of a non-political military that is not trained in law enforcement roles. Next, do you support revoking the pension that comes with anyone who is honorably discharged from the army?

Dan Driscoll (01:14:26):

It's hard to deal on a hypothetical center-

Sen. Slotkin (01:14:28):

It's not hypothetical. There's now focus on Mark Milley, the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs. And I know there's lots of controversy around Mark Milley, but you can't debate that he served many more years than anyone on this panel. Can you tell me that you support the seemingly political reprisal of removing someone's pension when they've already been honorably discharged?

Dan Driscoll (01:14:56):

Senator, without knowing the specific details, I do support the president's right to execute law for order.

Sen. Slotkin (01:15:02):

Because you see the pattern this starts. So then another administration comes in and suddenly people who supported Donald Trump are having their pensions removed. You can see how this politicizes the institution that should be apolitical. And for the January 6th guys and all these folks, there wasn't a question about their pensions, and I have deep concerns about it. I know my time is up and I yield back.

Roger Wicker (01:15:26):

Thank you very much. Senator Ernst, you were next.

Sen. Ernst (01:15:30):

Yes, thank you Mr. Chairman, and I will also add my condolences to the families who lost loved ones near DCA last night. Good morning Mr. Driscoll, and thank you for your testimony today and for being with us, and I appreciate the time you took to meet with me in my office and just dive into everything army. Very important to me obviously, my time in service, my family's time in service, and your time in service, so thank you. Once confirmed, you'll be facing a challenging path ahead, and you've already talked a little bit about recruiting, I'll add some thoughts to that. We also have to build upon the current modernization efforts, and of course we have very complex geopolitical landscapes out there. So I'm going to start with recruitment and I just want to give you some of my thoughts on this. Recruiting remains a really critical issue for the armed forces.

(01:16:31)
So Army is on track to meet its recruiting goals for the second consecutive year, that's an encouraging sign. We have to maintain the momentum. But a key concern that's been brought to my attention is ensuring our recruiters have meaningful access to schools to be able to get into high schools and talk to young men and women. I plan to introduce my Serve Act to enhance military recruiters access to schools and mandate regular visits to improve information sharing with the students and their administrators, and I would love to work with you on this particular issue once confirmed. And additionally, the military has faced challenges reaching potential recruits via social media, and we have seen a recent flurry of activities when it comes to Meta and regarding reports that US army posts were being shadow-banned or removed for alleged violations. I did send a letter to Meta about this last month. So Mr. Driscoll, given the challenges, do you commit to working with us on these recruiting challenges, on making sure that we're able to spread our good message to young men and women?

Dan Driscoll (01:17:49):

Absolutely Senator, it'd be an honor if confirmed.

Sen. Ernst (01:17:51):

Thank you. So very briefly, I'm also the chair of the DOGE caucus in the United States Senate, and Iowans sent me here to make them squeal. And I've made it my mission to find ways to identify waste, fraud, eliminate it, get more efficient, more accountable to our taxpayers. The Department of Defense, and of course our great army, should not be exempt from this effort. So Mr. Driscoll, can I count on your commitment to collaborate on strategies for reducing waste in the army?

Dan Driscoll (01:18:28):

Absolutely, Senator. And as I told your colleague earlier, the dollars are limited as they should be, and we are beholden to this committee and the Congress for how to use those dollars. But then once the dollars come to us, it's our responsibility to use them as effectively as we possibly can, and it would be an honor to work with you on that if confirmed.

Sen. Ernst (01:18:48):

Absolutely. Thank you, Mr. Driscoll. Another one of my top priorities remains addressing traumatic brain injuries, or TBI, within our services, and last year I successfully passed comprehensive TBI legislation, and I intend to build on that progress in the upcoming NDAA cycle. So can I get your commitment to collaborate with the defense health agency army, SOF, and acquisition personnel to prioritize TBI initiatives and further enhance our Army's immediate and long-term health and safety?

Dan Driscoll (01:19:22):

This issue, Senator, is deeply personal. When we were deployed, we had mortars and IEDs, and you never know how that impacts a soldier, but I know when we got back, a lot of our guys struggled with a lot of issues. And so I would be honored to do anything I possibly can to lend a hand here. So if confirmed, absolutely, yes.

Sen. Ernst (01:19:41):

Excellent. No, I appreciate that. Thank you. And I think both of us have had many friends that have been impacted by TBI. It is very, very important to them and their families. Force structure as well, I have limited time, but I do chair the Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities and I prioritize the Special Operations Community and the critical enablers that they provide. In recent years, the Army implemented force reductions within SOF. Despite these cuts, SOCOM has testified last year that the demand for special operations forces remain high. So Mr. Driscoll, will I get your commitment to work with me to make sure that we're addressing these cuts and how we can continue to provide for our special operations community so that they may further support our conventional forces?

Dan Driscoll (01:20:34):

Absolutely, Senator. Our special operators are force multipliers. If you look at the threats ahead, we have a pacing threat in China, but that certainly doesn't mean that other threats wouldn't take advantage of us being in engagement with China. And special forces are incredibly well suited to both lend a hand in that fight, and also, with all of our innovation, they are innovation laboratories that can test things more quickly, they can learn and get their procurement lessons and actual lessons learned to the larger force. So I'm incredibly supportive, Senator.

Sen. Ernst (01:21:06):

Well, thank you Mr. Driscoll. And Mr. Chair, I was going to ask him to sing the Army song, but I'll submit that for the record.

Roger Wicker (01:21:14):

Your time is expired, regrettably, Senator. But thank you for your questions. Senator Gillibrand,

Sen. Gillibrand (01:21:20):

Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman. I know you served your active duty tour with the Army at Fort Drum. Climb to glory. A little over a year ago, Fort Drum was selected to host the Army's second multi-domain task force. If confirmed, your tenure as secretary will align with the Army's target for the full MDTF implementation by fiscal year '28. What challenges do you see in this timeline, and do you believe the split structure of the second MDTF between Germany and Fort Drum is sustainable? And can the structure be leveraged in other theaters such as the Pacific?

Dan Driscoll (01:21:56):

Senator, I haven't been specifically briefed on that unit and its bifurcation of location, but the multi-domain rollout across the army is the future of warfare. If you think of things like cyber and space, how war has been fought up until this point will no longer look the same. Those issues require networked abilities that in near real time or real time allow for a communication across a lot of assets and sensing tools and human beings. And so I look forward to both learning more, working with your office and specifically returning to Fort Drum if confirmed.

Sen. Gillibrand (01:22:32):

Thank you. A recurring challenge that you and I talked about in our meeting for the military has been the recruitment and retention of skilled cyber operators, both military and civilian. As of November, the military reported about 28,000 unfilled military and civilian cyber roles. To help address this, I created the Cyber Service Academy Scholarship Program and secured language in the most recent NDAA to study the advisability of a cyber military service. Army Cyber is the largest of our cyber service components, placing a significant portion of this burden on you. How will you approach the cyber personnel challenge, and how do you see things like the Cyber Service Academy supporting your efforts?

Dan Driscoll (01:23:17):

Senator, very sincerely, thank you for your work on this. We are going to have to figure out and work together to create unique pathways for the cyber experts among us to be the most lethal cyber person or soldier. That pathway may look very different from going to ranger school and ending up in ranger battalion, and we need to work with the feeders and the pipelines in the civilian sector to empower those candidates who want to join the army, those future soldiers, to come in, and I think pathways, like what you were describing, are incredibly valuable.

Sen. Gillibrand (01:23:51):

You will need a capable and qualified principal cyber advisor, but that role has been vacant for nearly six months. Will you commit to me to quickly fill that role if you are confirmed?

Dan Driscoll (01:24:01):

Senator, that would be, if confirmed, one of the roles I'd be most excited to fill. I don't know what has led to the delay in filling it, so I can't speak to that, but I can commit to very early on trying to prioritize that because as stated earlier, with the way that multi-domain is going and our wars are going to be fought in the future, that will be a critical role.

Sen. Gillibrand (01:24:21):

Thank you. One of the issues that this committee has spent at least a decade working on is the scourge of sexual assault in the military. We put in place bipartisan reforms that had the support of 65 senators, it was overwhelmingly supported, and the reforms are geared towards more transparency, more accountability, more training, and having the decision-maker of whether a crime's been committed be given to a trained military prosecutor who isn't in the chain of command, who arguably has more precise and applicable training to reach better decisions. Are you aware of these reforms and do you commit to me that you will do everything to make sure these reforms are fully implemented so that our military can be a functioning place for everyone to work and that certain people are not unfortunately disregarded or devalued because of the system in place?

Dan Driscoll (01:25:18):

Very sincerely, Senator, I thank you and your colleagues for the work on this. I mentioned in my opening statement that my eight-year-old son is planning to join the army. It's hard to know if my six-year-old daughter wants to join, my wife and I have been nudging her that way, as much as you can nudge a six-year-old. I want her to join an army that the sky's the limit, the standards of excellence are hard, but she's able to achieve them. She faces absolutely zero instances of sexual harassment during her time in, and it would be an absolute honor, senator, to work with you in this committee to from the top ensure we are both rolling out the law and setting a culture where that is not tolerated in any way.

Sen. Gillibrand (01:25:58):

Thank you. With my last 20 seconds, you mentioned in the questions you gave to the committee that you wanted to appoint a high level position dedicated to ensuring a focus on ending sexual assault in the military. Do you have any thoughts about what your thinking is there or what you would do for that position?

Dan Driscoll (01:26:15):

Senator, I would want to work with you in your office and with your colleague, Senator Ernst. I know you've done a deep dive on this. I want to commit publicly to commit the resources, the time, the energy, and the focus to scorching it from the United States Army, and I think that that could be a powerful first step.

Sen. Gillibrand (01:26:32):

Thank you, Mr. Driscoll. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Roger Wicker (01:26:35):

Thank you, Senator Gillibrand. Senator Scott.

Sen. Scott (01:26:38):

Morning, Mr. Driscoll. Congratulations on your nomination, and thanks for your willingness to do this. I think I told you my father was one of 3000 people who did all four combat jumps with the 82nd airborne in the Second World War, he was crazy. After that, he fought in the Battle of the Bulge. My whole childhood he told me the Germans were horrible, the food was horrible and the foxholes was horrible, so after high school I joined the Navy which, the food wasn't bad, but no Germans, no foxholes. So first, tell me what your experience in the army, and thank you for your service as calvary scout platoon leader. What lessons did you learn that's going to make you a better Secretary of the Army?

Dan Driscoll (01:27:17):

Senator, Secretary Hegseth mentioned it in his hearing that the dust on the boots model, I had not thought of that in a long time, but the experiences of being able to think through when a decision from the top comes down, how does it actually impact the soldier. I can think back to our cop in outside Baghdad, Iraq, that had 40 of us, and we had these amazing vehicles, which I think probably this committee had a lot of help in getting these MRAPs out. When our soldiers first deployed, the bottom of these Humvees was thin and it basically perfectly absorbed a blast. And so these MRAPs were created, which saved a lot of lives. But one of the problems with the MRAPs is they were very heavy, very tall and very prone to roll over.

(01:28:01)
And so I can remember for the entire nine or 10 months we were at the cop, every couple of weeks you'd send a soldier out there, they would start up the MRAP, turn it on and run the engine for a couple of minutes and then turn it back off, and then the process would repeat itself, and it wasn't for any sort of mal intention, and the actions by those creating it were for good purposes, which is fundamentally the MRAP didn't work in a lot of areas in Iraq because it's muddy, dusty roads that just can't support a lot of weight. And so I think those types of experiences of saying this may be the right answer some of the time, but what is it actually going to look like for the actual soldier on the ground where we need this? I think that that will be a very impactful, or I hope if confirmed, that will be a very impactful vision.

Sen. Scott (01:28:47):

So I became governor of Florida in January 2011. I had no earthly idea that the Army Corps of Engineers was going to control every bit of development in my state. You couldn't do anything at their ports, you couldn't do anything in our rivers, there's so much the Army Corps of Engineers controlled. And my experience is it's just an absolute black hole. They're wonderful people, but you could never get an answer. Never get an answer about their timeline, never get an answer about why they make the decisions, it was just an absolute black hole. And it's been consistent for my eight years as governor and my six years up here. So I don't know if you've spent any time with the Army Corps of Engineers, wonderful people, but for anybody that wants to get anything accomplished in their state, it's just a pain in the royal butt. Have you thought about what you would do to change that?

Dan Driscoll (01:29:40):

Senator, one of the amazing parts of the army is that it does touch so many different parts of both our countrymen's lives and the lives of those abroad. When I talked to your colleague, Senator Warren, one of the things we had talked about is is it possible to do something like an NPS score, which is a net promoter score. It's pretty common in business. If you went to a Chick-fil-A, you might get a questionnaire afterwards, zero to 10, how likely would you be to refer this to a friend? And if we could start to do those in our communities where our bases are, either a broader or in our communities locally, I think what we would start to find is there are some low-hanging areas that when our soldiers are touching those in our civilian population, there are probably ways that we can just be more responsive. And so I would love, if confirmed, to work with this committee to try to figure out what low-hanging fruit exists to make the army a better co-inhabitant of the world and our country.

Sen. Scott (01:30:40):

In your private life, have you had to recruit employees? Have you recruited people to work with you, try to find how to work with people?

Dan Driscoll (01:30:48):

I have, senator.

Sen. Scott (01:30:49):

So why do you think the army has such a horrible experience trying to recruit people?

Dan Driscoll (01:30:56):

I think that from my experience as a third-generation soldier, what my grandfather would say he joined for, and we all joined during times of war. I think if you asked us, it would've been, we would've said the reason we joined is we didn't want to miss the opportunity to serve our country when it needed us. And I think that very specific story is what a lot of soldiers, women and men, would say is the reason that they joined. I think we have oftentimes lost focus on that and started to focus on things like the benefits, which are all important and they're very valuable reasons to join, but I think for many of America's youth, it is the purpose of getting to serve this amazing nation. And so if confirmed, I would love to work with this committee to clarify that story and tell it more broadly.

Sen. Scott (01:31:44):

Thanks. You'll do a great job.

Dan Driscoll (01:31:47):

Thank you, Senator.

Roger Wicker (01:31:48):

Thank you, Mr. Driscoll. You've made that point repeatedly during this hearing and I think it's got quite a bit of validity. Senator Rosen.

Sen. Rosen (01:32:00):

Thank you Mr. Chairman and ranking member Reed for holding this hearing. Mr. Driscoll, I'd like to thank you for your service, your willingness to serve again, and for being here with us today. I will take a moment of privilege like the rest of my colleagues and all Americans. Today our heart is broken by the events at DCA last night, and I just want to offer my deepest condolences to the families, to the fellow soldiers, to all of those who were lost. And I want to thank our first responders for their immediate action, running to the scene in the dark of night, in the iciest of waters, to try to save lives. Thank you. Now I'm going to turn to my home state of Nevada and talk a little bit about Hawthorne Army Depot. So Mr. Driscoll, Nevada's Hawthorne Army Depot is the world's largest ammunition depot and demilitarization facility. Depot stores and demilitarized munitions and ensures that munitions readiness for all of DOD.

(01:33:04)
Despite its size and crucial role that Hawthorne plays, again, the only one in the country, it is in need of continued infrastructure upgrades. Investing more in our munitions depots has only become more important in light of our need to ramp up munitions productions, both to arm Ukraine against Russian aggression and backfill our own stockpiles for just a few examples. So in recent years, Army's posture hearings, the secretary and chief of staff of the army made commitments to me to consider new investments in Hawthorne, and I'm happy that the army is doing so. So Mr. Driscoll, if confirmed, can I have your commitment to include Hawthorne in Army's future years defense planning or unfunded priority list so that Congress can fund these crucial and critical investments to ensure our munitions' readiness?

Dan Driscoll (01:33:52):

Senator, our munitions' readiness, as I was referencing to your colleagues, is absolutely one of the primary challenges facing us as a nation. As we face the threat of a peer like China, I absolutely commit to, if confirmed, taking a deep dive and look at this topic-

Sen. Rosen (01:34:08):

I invite you to come to Hawthorne and see what they're doing there. How's that?

Dan Driscoll (01:34:12):

It would be an honor, ma'am.

Sen. Rosen (01:34:13):

Thank you. I want to move now to women in combat because prior to women being able to serve in combat arms, cultural support teams, largely from the army reserve, embedded with special operations forces in Iraq and Afghanistan to engage with female populations. They fill critical gaps, significantly expanding operation and intelligence collection capabilities. However, in so many cases, their military records do not reflect that they served in combat despite accompanying SOF on raids and sustaining injuries, some even dying. This is because their reserve units who oversaw them administratively were not there to document their service in combat. So in some instances, these women have no record of ever having left the base despite having done so as a job requirement.

(01:35:04)
As a result, they've all struggled to prove to the VA that their injuries are service-related, they're combat-connected, and since women have only been able to serve in combat arms in the last decade. So if confirmed, will you commit to performing a review of these combat veterans, these women who embed overseas, to help us collect this important cultural intelligence army records? We must have them be accurate, these women come home, and they're denied their disability claims because the lack of documentation. They really need to receive the care and the benefits, their families as well, and the recognition that they deserve. And it's the least that we owe to our women in uniform.

Dan Driscoll (01:35:49):

Senator, we have a sacred duty to care for our soldiers, and from my experience deploying, some of the most competent, heroic people I deployed with were women. They served incredibly important jobs, with bomb-sniffing dogs, searching out IEDs. They were right beside us every step of the way, and so I absolutely commit to working with your office to make sure that that population is not forgotten and gets the care and respect that they deserve.

Sen. Rosen (01:36:17):

Thank you. I'm proud to serve with some women who showed their valor in times of need as well. I just have another moment, so we'll submit this for the record, but it's about cyber workforce development. It's been touched on here, the FY24 NDAA, and did include my bipartisan legislation authorizing the Army to create a civilian cybersecurity reserve to provide cybercom with qualified civilian personnel for surge capacity in times of need, to ensure the US government has the cyber talent needed to respond to malicious activities, secure DOD's information and systems. We're trying so many ways to really build up that force. I will take the answer off the record, but I'd like to speak with you about the implementation of the Civilian Cyber Reserve Corps and have your commitment to see this through as we know cyber attacks are on the rise.

Dan Driscoll (01:37:12):

If confirmed, it would be an honor to speak about that, Senator.

Sen. Rosen (01:37:15):

Thank you.

Roger Wicker (01:37:16):

Thank you, Senator Rosen. Senator Banks.

Sen. Banks (01:37:19):

Thank you Mr. Chairman. Mr. Driscoll, welcome and congratulations on your important nomination. You bring a unique background in business and private equity, and one of the biggest things that we have to accomplish in this moment is innovation at the Pentagon. I wonder if you could talk about your background and how that uniquely helps you help us create better innovation in our National Security.

Dan Driscoll (01:37:44):

Senator, after attending law school on the GI Bill, I was fortunate enough to spend time as a CEO at a venture capital firm where for a couple of years I got to spend time working with and learning and seeing how some of our country's most amazing innovators are building their businesses. And some of the lessons that they have learned in the private space over the last 10 to 20 years, I think are ripe for transferal to the United States Army. Creating a feedback loop and a learning loop that gets lessons learned from the actual soldiers in the field back into the manufacturers or the software developers occurs in the private space frequently, I think it is a little bit less frequent in the Army.

(01:38:26)
There are examples of this, I think, working wonderfully in the Army, like the IVAS system as I understand it, is a shining beacon of effective development. And so what I'm hoping to do if confirmed, Senator, is work with this committee and the Army's existing leaders to figure out where can we tighten the innovation loop and get the learnings from the field and the learnings from our friends in places like Ukraine. I mean, that battlefield is ripe with lessons around drones and cyber and how can we get those lessons into our procurement processes and on the manufacturing floor as quickly as possible.

Sen. Banks (01:39:01):

Part of working in venture capital and when it comes to innovation is thinking outside of the box, and we have a major crisis in the military right now, especially with the United States Army, with a historic recruitment crisis. I know you've already covered this, but give us more specific ideas that we can use new technologies and innovation to recruit the best and brightest of the next generation to serve our country.

Dan Driscoll (01:39:25):

I think if you look senator, there are a lot of tools used by some of our larger corporations in the country to recruit at scale but give a very individualized and personalized experience. What I have heard with the recruiting processes, they're looking at all sorts of different ways of creating a specialty where a recruiter, if you're an incredible recruiter, perhaps that can be how you serve your country for your entire time in uniform. Things like that that mimic the expertise that can be developed in the private sector, applying those best lessons and processes to the Army, I think will continue to unlock what has seemed to be no doubt, a lot because of the work of this committee, forward momentum in recruiting in the Army right now.

Sen. Banks (01:40:07):

Secretary Hegseth has talked at length about restoring the meritocracy to our military, and I happen to believe that the recruitment crisis faced in the military today has a lot to do with taking merit out of the military. Young men and women say, why would I join the military if it's no longer the great meritocracy that it used to be? So I think restoring that would be important to the army. And on that note, last year the army argued that affirmative action at our service academies was, quote, critical to mission success and national security. And when I asked the Secretary of the Army, Wormuth, last year in the House Armed Services Committee where I previously served, whether the Supreme Court harmed national security when it banned affirmative action at schools with ROTC programs, she admitted she was, quote, a little puzzled why affirmative action at West Point wasn't also banned. Mr. Driscoll, do racial admission preferences at service academies like West Point help our national security?

Dan Driscoll (01:41:08):

I don't believe so.

Sen. Banks (01:41:10):

And you would support efforts, as Secretary Hegseth has talked about as well, to end affirmative action at our service academies, especially at West Point?

Dan Driscoll (01:41:18):

I think one of the most amazing parts of my time in service is the Army in my experience was an incredible meritocracy. I can't remember a single time being in where anyone thought that this system was against them. And when I have told our kids, Daniel and Lila, about what we hope that they will do after high school, I have told my daughter it would be the proudest day of my life, and I don't think she understands the nuance of what I'm saying, to pin a ranger tab on her if she can complete ranger school, with the incredibly difficult standards being the exact same as when I went through. And so I think that those standards and excellence that the Secretary of Defense has talked about are important, it's what makes our army great.

Dan Driscoll (01:42:00):

… what's made our army the greatest land fighting force in the last 249 years on the planet earth and I hope that we're able to hold those standards going forward.

Sen. Banks (01:42:08):

You bring a lot to the table. I'm excited to work with you to make the Army as strong as it can possibly be, fix the recruitment crisis, and modernize the Army for the future. Thank you for agreeing to serve our country. You have my full support.

Roger Wicker (01:42:22):

Thank you very much, Senator Banks. Mr. Driscoll, I've said that the United States military is the greatest civil rights organization in the history of the world. What do you think about that?

Dan Driscoll (01:42:35):

My experience, Senator, is the exact same.

Roger Wicker (01:42:38):

Yes. Having served in the Air Force, that's been my experience and so I do appreciate that. Senator Peters.

Senator Peters (01:42:45):

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Driscoll, congratulations on your nomination to serve as the Secretary of the Army and I want to thank you for your service to our nation as well as thank you for the time that we spent in my office earlier. We addressed a number of concerns and I think we had a very fruitful discussion, so I appreciate that. As you know, senior officials and combatant commands have testified before this committee on the severe threat that's posed by PRC-sponsored cyber actors. The threat is evidenced by the Salt Typhoon, the recent infiltration of US telecommunication companies that left civilians, service members, and installations vulnerable to these attacks. The attack is part of a broader pattern of PRC cyber aggression targeting US infrastructure across the country. The US army plays a critical role in deterring these threats through defensive cyber operations, through intelligence, integration with US cyber command as well to protect us. So my question for you, sir, is do you agree with the Army's current cyber strategy?

Dan Driscoll (01:43:57):

Senator, I think the cyber threat to this country… I was actually beside one of our elected officials when we found out our phones were hacked and I was reflecting with them that all that we do to protect our information and keep it classified…. If things like our Verizon cell phone network are going to be compromised, we have to think through a lot of the ways that we've designed our information protection systems. I think cyber with the changes occurring with quantum computing, the changes with generative AI, these are fundamentally going to alter how soldiers fight wars, how information is exchanged on the battlefield, how we prepare, and then the kind of gray zone activities that our peers like China are able to do through cyber are scary. I have not received a formal brief, but my understanding is that the Army actually is taking steps in the right direction. I look forward to learning more and working with your office as I know this is close to your heart to make the Army as effective as I can both on offense and defense in cyber.

Senator Peters (01:44:56):

So specifically about the strategy because certainly we're in total agreement with the statement that you made, but as far as the strategy that the Army is using now, what's your assessment and would you change anything to support operations with what you know of the strategy now?

Dan Driscoll (01:45:12):

My understanding now, Senator, is that our offensive capabilities are perhaps not where they should be and I think our adversaries are being much more aggressive with us than we are with them. And I would want to take a deep look at that.

Senator Peters (01:45:29):

The intelligence systems play a pivotal role in informing commanders' decisions and the adoption of AI is changing that dramatically. Question to you is about the AI implementation strategy that the Army currently has. Do you have any changes or do you believe the Army is adequately evaluating this threat and adapting accordingly?

Dan Driscoll (01:45:54):

Senator, my understanding of how AI implementation is occurring is that it is siloed right now. I think that this is the type of work that should occur across the different services. Our lessons learned for the Army will apply to the Air Force and apply the Navy and so I think we need to be focusing on this AI threat because the speed and the pace of the growth here is unbelievable. I don't know if you read the article about the Chinese startup that basically was able to… I think it was between four and $10 million, 1/10000th of the cost or 1/1000th of the cost of what some of our American companies were able to develop, six-month trailing. It is not going to be the pacing and the timeline on this, is not going to allow us to be slow and so we're going to need to be at the front curve of it.

Senator Peters (01:46:44):

So that leads the question that how do we stay at that front curve? Because you're right, things are changing dramatically. Traditionally in the Army or any of the services, innovation has not moved as quickly as it has in the civilian side and civilian side innovation's only accelerating, including our adversaries as you mentioned. So how would you engage with small businesses and other innovators to shake up the procurement process and make sure we're on the forefront of AI development, for example?

Dan Driscoll (01:47:16):

I'm optimistic, Senator. I think from what I've seen since being the president's nominee, we have had a lot of interest from Silicon Valley and other places in the country for innovators at small companies, medium companies, and some of the big ones that want to get in the game on behalf of our country. I think having very deliberate conversations with them about how do we get into their R&D pipeline, how do we partner with them early on, so as they're training these models. The Army as I understand it today is getting access to these models once they go public. China and our other threats are also getting access to those models. There's no reason that, from my understanding, we couldn't be getting access earlier and so instead of having a six-month lead, perhaps there are ways we could have a nine or 12 month lead on these things. And so I think those conversations could be important and I would look forward to working with your office to have them.

Senator Peters (01:48:06):

Great. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Roger Wicker (01:48:07):

Thank you, Senator Peters. Senator Duckworth.

Senator Duckworth (01:48:11):

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I, like everyone else, am praying for all the family members and thinking about the crew of the Black Hawk and all the people that we lost last night. I would like to caution that before we start calling it a training accident that we have better idea of what exactly happened because a training accident has very specific definitions, so please be careful about that. It tends to then start to blame the pilots and frankly, our military pilots are some of the best trained in the world. Earlier this week the Trump administration imposed a funding freeze on all federal grants and loans. Even though the OMB memo was rescinded yesterday, the freeze has not been rescinded. Mr. Driscoll, what is your position on the legality of that funding freeze?

Dan Driscoll (01:49:01):

Senator, before answering your question, I very sincerely… Last night I was sitting watching what occurred on TV with a friend from 10th Mountain who was the downed chopper… One of the platoons that had to deal with that in Afghanistan and watching this struggle and heartbreak as he had to relive those moments. We actually reflected in the moment… I want to take a quick moment to say very sincerely, thank you for your service. I know it's an immense sacrifice. Soldier to soldier, I'm sorry for what you had go through. To your question, the legality of the… Would you mind repeating it?

Senator Duckworth (01:49:35):

Was the order from President Trump…? His current order to pause all grant funding legal?

Dan Driscoll (01:49:43):

Senator, I haven't been able to take a good deep enough look to know whether it was legal or not, but I would not believe that the president would issue an illegal order.

Senator Duckworth (01:49:53):

You don't believe that the President of the United States can issue an illegal order?

Dan Driscoll (01:49:57):

I don't believe President Trump would do that, Senator.

Senator Duckworth (01:50:00):

Okay. That leads me to my next question. If President Trump directed you to do something illegal, would you refuse to obey?

Dan Driscoll (01:50:07):

I reject the premise of the question, Senator, that he would, but I would only follow lawful orders.

Senator Duckworth (01:50:13):

And constitutional ones?

Dan Driscoll (01:50:14):

And constitutional ones.

Senator Duckworth (01:50:15):

Okay. If confirmed, will you commit to dispersing all obligated grant funding from the Department of the Army on time and without delay?

Dan Driscoll (01:50:24):

I would follow all lawful requirements of my job if confirmed, Senator.

Senator Duckworth (01:50:29):

Okay. I'd like to follow up on our meeting last week. To be candid, you performed very poorly in your conversation with me. I asked you, for example, how many personnel are in a division and you told 35,000. You just recently when I came were answering my colleague from Alaska's questions about brigade combat teams. How many personnel are in an average brigade combat team?

Dan Driscoll (01:50:54):

Senator, I imagine the purpose of this question is to get to my qualifications as a leader.

Senator Duckworth (01:50:58):

No, no. I want you to answer the question.

Dan Driscoll (01:51:00):

Senator-

Senator Duckworth (01:51:01):

What is the…? Do you not know? If you don't know, that's okay.

Dan Driscoll (01:51:05):

Senator, I assume-

Senator Duckworth (01:51:06):

Answer my question. How many personnel in…? Because you've performed very well today and I've been impressed because it looks like you actually did some homework, but you spoke with conviction about the number of brigade combat teams that the Army needs to be effective. Can you tell me how many soldiers are in a brigade combat team on average?

Dan Driscoll (01:51:26):

3,500.

Senator Duckworth (01:51:27):

Great. Thank you. See, I would've been so much easier, but I know you're filibustering. I get it. What's FM 3-0?

Dan Driscoll (01:51:34):

Senator, I believe all of these questions are going to be-

Senator Duckworth (01:51:37):

What is FM 3-0?

Dan Driscoll (01:51:39):

I actually was reading it last night, Senator-

Senator Duckworth (01:51:40):

Excellent.

Dan Driscoll (01:51:40):

It's the Army's training manual.

Senator Duckworth (01:51:42):

Operations.

Dan Driscoll (01:51:42):

Operations manuals.

Senator Duckworth (01:51:43):

Fantastic. I'm glad you're doing your homework. See, this is working because you're doing your homework, which you did not do because you couldn't name a country in Africa where we have troops when I asked you.

Dan Driscoll (01:51:53):

Senator, I believe-

Senator Duckworth (01:51:54):

What is your views on force posture generally and the components and elements of force posture as well as your understanding of the Army's current force posture?

Dan Driscoll (01:52:03):

Senator, I believe that the President of the United States chose me specifically because of my experience set that your colleagues-

Senator Duckworth (01:52:10):

You're not answering. Does that mean that you do not have an opinion on the Army's current force posture? It's my job to advise and consent on the nominees that the president puts forward. Just because a president puts forward a nominee does not mean that person is automatically qualified to do the job. My question to you is, sir, as someone who will become Secretary of Army, if confirmed, what is your current opinion of the Army's force posture and can you describe the elements of that force posture?

Dan Driscoll (01:52:41):

Absolutely. Senator, and to your Africa comment, West Africa and Horn of Africa. I did study after you asked me that question. So I'm grateful for the question.

Senator Duckworth (01:52:50):

Answer my question on force posture.

Dan Driscoll (01:52:52):

We need to be prepared, Senator, for a threat from China, a peer that we have not-

Senator Duckworth (01:52:57):

I'm not asking you about near-peer threats. I'm asking you about the force posture.

Dan Driscoll (01:53:00):

We need our forces postured all over the world to respond-

Senator Duckworth (01:53:03):

What are the components of the force posture?

Dan Driscoll (01:53:05):

Senator, I believe that the question-

Senator Duckworth (01:53:06):

The answer is military disposition, strength, and condition and readiness of the military. It's in FM 3-0 operations which you were reading last night. Can you outline for me the key capabilities that the Army is supposed to provide the combatant command?

Roger Wicker (01:53:19):

Senator, you can ask that question for the record. Your time has expired.

Senator Duckworth (01:53:22):

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Rescued by the Chairman.

Roger Wicker (01:53:28):

Senator Budd.

Senator Budd (01:53:30):

Thank you, Mr. Chairman-

Senator Duckworth (01:53:31):

I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman. Can I add FM 3-0, the Army's operations manual for the record? Include in the record?

Roger Wicker (01:53:43):

Well, without objection-

Senator Duckworth (01:53:46):

Thank you.

Roger Wicker (01:53:46):

But let me ask you this. How many pages does that consist of?

Senator Duckworth (01:53:50):

It's quite a few pages actually, but it's a basic reading for anybody who's gone through the officer's basic course, which I believe you have completed. Have you not, Mr. Driscoll?

Dan Driscoll (01:53:58):

Senator, it's 350 pages approximately.

Senator Duckworth (01:54:01):

There you go.

Roger Wicker (01:54:02):

So you really do want us to go to the expense of reprinting something that's widely available? Could we just refer to it?

Senator Duckworth (01:54:11):

That is acceptable to me, Mr. Chairman.

Roger Wicker (01:54:13):

All right, thank you very much. Senator Budd.

Senator Budd (01:54:16):

Thank you again, Mr. Chairman. And again, welcome, Mr. Driscoll. It's good to see you. As a fellow North Carolinian, I know… And as you are someone who served in the Army, I know our hearts are broken with the recent flight, with the aircrew, the Black Hawk. Having a family of army aviation and army aviators, my hearts are especially broken. I want to congratulate you as a friend. It's been good to know you for several years and this is a great role that you've been nominated to and I'm proud to see someone born and raised in North Carolina, particularly western North Carolina, to serve in this role. So many from the Army were serving there in days following recent Hurricane Helene. Mr. Driscoll, in your advanced policy questions, you identify recruiting as one of the most significant challenges facing the Army. So if confirmed, how would you recommend the Army fix this recruiting challenge?

Dan Driscoll (01:55:20):

Senator, I had mentioned to your colleagues a couple of things that the Army has done really well as it seems from the outside.

Senator Budd (01:55:27):

Right.

Dan Driscoll (01:55:28):

The Future Soldier training course at Fort Jackson where I did basic training that prepares soldiers to take their ASVAB test and get more prepared from their fitness… Get more fit before they go to basic training has seemed to pay dividends. That type of thing, that type of innovation I think could be spread farther around the country to continue to increase the pipeline of the population that is qualified. But more specifically, I think telling this story of the United States Army with its 250th anniversary coming up this summer is an incredible time through our JRTCs, through communities across the country to build up the pipeline of freshmen, sophomores, juniors, and seniors in high school who can join. This is the year to tell the story of the women and the men in uniform who have done amazing things on behalf of our country and who I think would say like me had their lives changed by this experience. So Senator, I look forward to working with you and this committee if confirmed to make this year the Army's best recruiting year in history.

Senator Budd (01:56:29):

I look forward to that as well. Thank you. As you know, Special Operations Forces, and I think you spoke about this with some of my colleagues prior to me, but they're essential in responding to irregular warfare. North Carolina is home, and for the purpose of this morning, maybe we'll call it Fort Bragg and Special Operations Forces… Special Operations are now playing a larger role in the cyber and the space domains. Yet the Army recently decided to cut significant number of Army Special Operations Forces. So in your advanced policy questions, you state that Army Special Forces play a critical role in supporting the joint force and accomplishing the objectives of the National Defense Strategy. Do you believe that SOF is still relevant today?

Dan Driscoll (01:57:15):

Wholeheartedly, Senator. Just from my qualitative experience, the special operators that I was fortunate enough to serve alongside of were some of the most incredible soldiers that I ever saw. They were innovation laboratories, testing out all sorts of new things from new weapons to backpacks to whatever it was. And a lot of the lessons that they learned, even if it wasn't formal, trickled down to the larger force. And so, Senator, I think unequivocally on a go-forward basis, they are a crucial force multiplier for our army.

Senator Budd (01:57:46):

Well, thank you. In my recent visits there to Fort Liberty, Fort Bragg, I have seen the same thing continuing today and I know you'll see that very soon, if confirmed. As you work to address recruiting more broadly, what strategies will you pursue to increase the pool of recruits so that they're eligible and have qualifications to serve in Army Special Operations Forces positions?

Dan Driscoll (01:58:10):

Senator, my understanding, which I had covered with one of your colleagues, was one of the problems with what we've done by digitizing medical records is accidentally we have taken people who have broken arms but have been an ultra-marathoner or who have had an inhaler prescribed when they were 13 and a day. These were the types of things that for 249 years or 244 of those years just would've never come up. Either you wouldn't have remembered to put it down or your recruiter would told you it wasn't relevant. And right now it is blocking a lot of possible soldiers who I believe would be incredible future soldiers. And so I think taking a deep dive on the incentive structure for how we do waivers and maybe working with this committee to look back at. Should some of these things, should flat feet still be preventative of joining? I don't have an opinion on the matter, but I think it's worth a fresh look.

Senator Budd (01:59:04):

Thank you. And again, I appreciate your willingness to serve our country and I wish you the best.

Dan Driscoll (01:59:09):

Thank you, Senator.

Roger Wicker (01:59:12):

Thank you very much. Mr. Driscoll, before I recognize Senator Hirono, I want to make sure I get this straight. As a Mississippi young man, I joined the Air Force and was stationed at Seymour Johnson Air Force Base in Goldsboro, North Carolina. You would agree, would you not, that eastern North Carolina barbecue is far superior to Lexington-type of barbecue?

Senator Budd (01:59:42):

I would ask you not to answer the question, sir.

Dan Driscoll (01:59:45):

So as someone from western North Carolina, Senator, my heart bleeds the thick ketchup-based barbecue that I grew up with, but I can concede that Lexington barbecue is exceptional.

Roger Wicker (01:59:59):

Well, there's no accounting for taste, but a pretty good answer. Senator Hirono.

Senator Hirono (02:00:06):

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I did want to take a moment to extend my condolences to all those affected by the tragic accident last night near Reagan National Airport and the brave army soldiers on board the helicopter. Mr. Driscoll, I ask the following two initial questions of all nominees who come before any of the committees on which I sit to ensure the fitness of the nominees. Since you became a legal adult, have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature?

Dan Driscoll (02:00:46):

Never.

Senator Hirono (02:00:47):

Have you ever faced discipline or entered into a settlement relating to this kind of conduct?

Dan Driscoll (02:00:52):

Never.

Senator Hirono (02:00:54):

Mr. Driscoll, several of the critical training areas that the Army uses in Hawaii are leased from the state, including Pohaku Loa and the leases are set to expire in 2029. These leases are vital to ensuring military forces can adequately train in the Pacific. However, the land involved also holds cultural significance to the native Hawaiian community. How do you plan to approach these important lease renegotiations? And will you commit to engaging in good faith with state officials and the community to ensure that the leases are negotiated in a way that is fair to the state, the people of Hawaii, and the military?

Dan Driscoll (02:01:45):

Senator, this is an incredibly important issue, not just in Hawaii, but in all the places we engage with the community and sign leases. I would absolutely commit to wanting to work with your office and then to engage with community members to ensure the Army is being its best neighbor that it can be. Earlier in the hearing I was referencing with your colleague, Senator Warren and I were chatting about this, both kind of abroad how the Army exists in its footprint, but then specifically domestically, how the Army and its soldiers and the civilians that work on the bases engage with the community and the youth in that community is directly correlated to who gets a taste of what the Army has to offer and who gets to see what a life in the Army can do for them. And so I think it is both the right thing to do and the selfish thing to do to be the best neighbors we can be.

Senator Hirono (02:02:37):

Mr. Driscoll, I want to particularly emphasize how important these negotiations are and how they're conducted because the military of late has been criticized for what happened at Red Hill basically involving the Navy. But as far as the community is concerned, what happens to one service is something that impacts all of the other services. So it is really critical that you engage with the community. So going to modernizing DOD infrastructure is one of my top priorities. And the Army has a deep backlog of maintenance and modernization for its facilities. And sadly, for example, in Hawaii, 50% of army facilities are classified as failing or failed, and the cost to repair or replace them is over $ 5 billion. This is just involving Hawaii. So we need to have a functioning infrastructure critical to military readiness. How are you planning to address the Army's infrastructure issue in Hawaii and in the greater Indo-Pacific?

Dan Driscoll (02:03:48):

Senator, I've had many friends stationed in Hawaii, and though the experience has been good, I think that they might echo that some of the maintenance issues exist. We owe a duty to our soldiers and their families. My daughter, my six-year-old Lila is named after my E6's daughter Lila. She lives on military-

Senator Hirono (02:04:07):

So Mr. Driscoll, my time is running out. And so what I am getting from you is that there is a commitment to deal with the lagging infrastructure throughout the military and the Army. So I will certainly be holding you to that, should you be confirmed. Let me get to mass deportations. President Trump has already ordered thousands of additional Army soldiers to the southern border. Experts have said deporting over 11 million people, these are the people who are undocumented, will require tens of thousands of personnel, hundreds of billions of dollars, and years to complete. The Army is the primary military service who would be called upon to support a mass deportation order. What impact would deploying tens of thousands of troops have on Army readiness?

Dan Driscoll (02:05:01):

Senator, my understanding from the outside is that the Army stands by and stands ready to support the President's mission to defend the border-

Senator Hirono (02:05:08):

Well, if you have to deploy 10,000 people or more from the Army to do that, I would say that it is going to impact army readiness for the other purposes for which the Army is stood up. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Roger Wicker (02:05:23):

Thank you, Senator Hirono. Senator Schmitt.

Senator Schmitt (02:05:26):

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yeah, I agree. Actually, Joe Biden letting in 15 million people here necessitating the mass deportations is a problem. But Bill Clinton deported 12 million people. Barack Obama deported 8 million people. So deportations, they may have been suspended over the last four years, but is exactly what people voted for. They're tired of the lawlessness. But for you, thanks for being here and thanks for your willingness to serve. As you know, I am very supportive of your nomination. I think you're going to do a great job and I think you're going to provide a great perspective for what the Army really needs. And I think your energy and your attitude and the way you explain why you served and I think a way forward to improve recruiting is actually… I've not heard that before.

(02:06:21)
You hear it from soldiers and you hear it from people who are actually serving but for somebody that's serving in your capacity, I think it's a great way to sort of frame the importance of the recruitment challenges that we have and how we get beyond it. I do want to ask about Fort Leonard Wood. We talked about it. Missouri, we're really blessed to have Fort Leonard Wood in our state. It's pretty uniquely situated in that it's in a rural setting with the Mark Twain Forest. You got a lot of room and I think that maneuverability that you get and the versatility that you get, including from other branches in law enforcement, to train there is a pretty unique asset. So just a couple of questions on that.

(02:07:06)
There's been some talk, and I mentioned this to you, not really from the Army, but from the Defense Health Agency… There's a hospital there that's really important, not just to the base, but to the community there. And there's been some discussion about downgrading that to some sort of health clinic. Will you commit to working with me to make sure that that doesn't happen? I think they've sort of backtracked from that, but that would be devastating for the Fort Leonard Wood community. Is that something we can work on?

Dan Driscoll (02:07:32):

Senator, it would be an honor to work with your office. And as somebody who grew up in the mountains of North Carolina and my wife is a physician, access to healthcare is a real thing. If you take that access away, it can completely change how a community is able to function. And so this is an important issue and I would look forward to working with you if confirmed.

Senator Schmitt (02:07:50):

And can you talk a little bit about the benefits of having a sort of centrally located base like that at Fort Leonard Wood? You've got all the real estate you need. There's been significant upgrades made, hundreds of millions of dollars pumped into the new housing there. So for the long term, it's a great place for us to kind of stage operations. A lot of people get their early training there, but why that is important to the Army to have a base like that?

Dan Driscoll (02:08:18):

My understanding, Senator, of your description, and if confirmed I'd be honored to visit it with you, is the base can scale for future needs that we just don't know about. In a lot of areas, the bases are constrained by what's around them. This base seems to have the ability that if we needed it in one day, one year, or 10 years to scale for things… We don't quite know what we need. We don't know where our soldiers need to be positioned. We don't know what testing requirements will be. Fort Leonard Wood seems like an amazing place to be able to expand.

Senator Schmitt (02:08:48):

Well, the folks back home would be happy to hear that you want to come by. And Missouri barbecue is the best in the country, so we'll make sure you get some of that. My Texas friends and Carolina friends may disagree, but they're wrong. They're wrong. I want to ask, we talked a little bit in my office and others may have touched on this too, but clearly our chief adversary is China. And so the Army is reorienting itself a little bit for this challenge. And can you talk about how you see it? And some things that if you were just talking to somebody on the street about what the Army's traditionally done and what it's going to need to do in the future to prepare for what could potentially be this struggle of course for the 21st century?

Dan Driscoll (02:09:38):

Absolutely, Senator. My time in deployed, and I think my friends who deployed to Afghanistan and my experience in Iraq, most of the movements were squad level movements. So you would have, call it, 15 to 25 men and women doing most actions. The logistics, getting things in and out of the countries was less contested. If you needed water or fuel, you could get it from the continental United States to those theaters quickly and relatively easily. An engagement with a peer like China will be a completely and totally different thing than I have seen in my time on the planet Earth. Everything can be contested. It is a peer adversary who will do everything they can to defeat us. And this requires, let's call it a pre-war time footing for us as an army and us as a people to get ourselves ready to engage in a conflict that could fundamentally alter our future way of life if we're not ready for it.

Senator Schmitt (02:10:31):

Thank you. And as you know, I support you and I think you're going to do a great job. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Roger Wicker (02:10:36):

Thank you, Senator Schmitt. And thank you, Mr. Driscoll. We appreciate your answers to the questions today and we appreciate your willingness to serve and we will now close the hearing. For the information of our members, questions for the record will be due to the committee within two business days of the conclusion of this hearing. And with that, if there's no objection, we are adjourned.

Speaker 2 (02:11:03):

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.