Houlahan Rips DoD Hiring Freeze As' Disastrous For Our National Security'—Then John McGuire Responds

Forbes Breaking News

During a House Armed Services Committee hearing in July, Rep, Chrissy Houlahan (D-PA) and Rep. John McGuire (R-VA) debated an amendment which would exempt some jobs from a hiring freeze at the Department of Defense.

Transcript

00:00We will now consider log number 5176R1 by Mr. Sorensen of Illinois. For what

00:08purpose does the gentleman from Illinois seek recognition? Mr. Chairman, I have an

00:11amendment at the desk. Will the clerk please distribute the amendment without

00:14objection. The reading of the amendment is dispensed with. The chair recognizes

00:18the gentleman from Illinois for the purposes of explaining his amendment.

00:22Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This amendment would solidify the existing exemptions to OPM's

00:26hiring freeze on the Department of Defense. But like so much in this bill, let's

00:31talk about why this is so important. In February, the administration put a hiring

00:35freeze into effect for the Department of Defense, even as the world becomes more

00:39dangerous. Now, a month later, a memo came out that listed different jobs that can

00:44be exempted from the hiring freeze. Now, this is important because we must remain

00:50ready for everything. And my amendment would codify this list for 2026.

00:56The list includes educators, childcare workers, technicians, firefighters, and medical staff

01:03on our bases. These jobs are essential. They're also my neighbors who work at the

01:08Rock Island Arsenal in the Quad Cities. At the Arsenal, we're 3D printing. We're casting

01:13metal at our foundry. We're developing new technology. You name it, we're probably

01:16already doing it. Now, these are just two pieces of a drone that are manufactured by

01:22workers at the Joint Manufacturing and Technology Center at Rock Island. But these

01:27parts are being made using new state-of-the-art technology never used before. Developing components

01:35that are necessary for American success on the battlefield of the future. This is

01:41non-controversial stuff. This amendment also allows the workers supplying medium to large

01:46caliber ammunition at the Iowa Army Ammunition Plant in Burlington, Iowa. It helps workers keep their

01:52fighter jets ready for the next mission in Ogden in Utah. It helps workers at Tobiana Army Depot

01:59near Scranton, Pennsylvania because they're going to put the inner workings and sensors into the drones

02:03that we manufacture at Rock Island. If we want readiness, we must make sure that our organic,

02:10industrial bases have the ability to make their own hiring decisions. My amendment does nothing more

02:17than codify the administration's existing exemptions to the hiring freeze. It is essential to readiness

02:24and ultimately our military safety. I urge all of my colleagues to support this common sense amendment

02:31and I yield back. Gentleman yields back. Chair now recognizes himself. Although I am in agreement with Mr.

02:37Sorenson and the Secretary of Defense that these positions are vital to national security and should be

02:43exempt from the hiring freeze, there is absolutely no reason to put what is already policy into statute.

02:50This amendment unnecessarily restricts the President and SecDef for managing the personnel and DOD. I

02:55oppose all amendments to codify hiring exemptions as unnecessary limitations on the President and

03:00Secretary of Defense's authority to dynamically manage their workforce. Chair now recognize the gentlelady

03:06from Pennsylvania, Ms. Houlihan. Thank you Mr. Chairman and I also very much support this number 5176

03:14because anyone who is in the military or who has been in the military knows how essential that our

03:20civilian counterparts are to the successful execution of our mission. The Trump administration slashed the

03:26federal workforce very chaotically eliminating thousands of roles that are essential to the military

03:31operations as well as remote work options for military spouses. And that doesn't make our military or our

03:37country safer or stronger or more prosperous. And the most recent reductions in force in the State

03:43Department and the rescission process are prime examples of that. Expelling thousands of experts and

03:50cutting millions of dollars of essential programs is disastrous for our national security. But the

03:56administration continues to do just this. Our military does not exist in a vacuum. It needs civilian

04:02support and the administration's actions across the federal government will undoubtedly impact our

04:07military readiness. It is for that reason that I support this amendment. Thank you and I yield back.

04:12Chair now recognize the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. McGuire. Thank you Mr. Chairman. We are in agreement. I oppose this

04:20amendment from the gentleman from Illinois. I recognize that these positions are vital and should be exempt from

04:26a hiring freeze. However, there is no reason to put what is already policy into statute. This amendment

04:33unnecessarily restricts the President and Secretary of Defense from managing personnel in their agency.

04:40If we were sufficiently crew our ships in the future, this would prevent the Secretary of Defense from

04:46properly managing his force because Congress made a blanket rule restricted his authority. Any amendment that

04:52codifies hiring exemptions unnecessarily limits the President and Secretary of Defense authority to

04:59manage their workforce effectively, so I urge my colleagues to vote no. And with that I yield back.

05:05Gentleman yields back. Chair now recognize the gentlelady from New Jersey, Ms. Sherrill.

05:11Thank you Mr. Chairman. I speak today in strong support for my colleague's amendment that enshrines certain

05:17protections for our DOD civilians into law, which I think is completely necessary given the work of

05:24this committee to try to manage and mitigate the complete incompetence coming from the Secretary of

05:29Defense in this administration when it comes to DOD related matters. The Trump administration's slash to

05:35the civil service is not just an attack on government workers, it's a direct threat to our national

05:40security and to the economic stability of communities like mine in New Jersey. At Picatinny Arsenal, we have

05:47engineers, science and support staff who are building the future of our national defense, developing the

05:52weapon systems our service members rely on to stay safe and to succeed. Picatinny is a vital hub for U.S.

06:00military innovation, especially in advanced munitions and armaments that keep our troops safe and mission ready.

06:07Cutting civil service roles here directly weakens our military's ability to develop, test, and deliver

06:15cutting-edge weaponry. Many of our civil servants have had years of specialized training in metallurgy,

06:21physics, and chemistry, some of it at the post-grad level at the Picatinny armament school that I'm working

06:27to get accredited and which has graduated 41 master's degree recipients and two PhDs. So in delivering these

06:35cuts, we will cut our, we will harm and weaken our military's ability to develop, test, and deliver cutting-edge weaponry,

06:43not just today, but for years to come. Slashing civil service positions, risk shifting, critical expertise

06:50to private contractors, driving up costs, and reducing institutional knowledge within the government.

06:56Maintaining a robust civil service at Picatinny ensures that the U.S. retains strategic control over

07:02weapons development and innovation. Cutting civil service jobs at Picatinny is not just an attack on New

07:08Jersey workers. It's an attack on our national security. And as someone who has served her country,

07:13I know we need to strengthen, not weaken, our defense capabilities. I'll fight to protect every job

07:19and every innovation effort at Picatinny because America's security depends on it. Thank you. And I yield back.

07:25General Lady yields back. Does any other members seek to speak on Mr. Sorenson's amendment?

07:32There is no further debate. The question occurs on the amendment by Mr. Sorenson. So many as are in favor

07:38will say aye. Those opposed, no. No. Opinion of the chair, the noes have it. Mr. Chairman, I ask for the

07:45yes and nays. Recorded votes requested. Recorded vote is postponed.

Category

Transcript

Be the first to comment

Recommended