A Capitol Hill Dud

By Colleen Roberts
STARRS co-CT State Leader

Anyone anticipating verbal ‘fireworks’ during the March 26, 2025 SASC “Status of the Military Service Academies” subcommittee hearing on Capitol Hill, or expecting that hard-hitting questions would be directed to the three service academy superintendents giving testimony, was sorely disappointed.

Like a firecracker that fails to fully ignite and take off, the hearing was a dud, sputtering along to its conclusion and finally fizzling out.

Viewers who watched the livestream learned little of real substance except that the Republican committee members apparently thought the event was some sort of tea party.

On the other hand, the Democratic members were prepared to use the hearing as an opportunity to publicly grandstand and excoriate the Trump administration for the rollback of the prior administration’s Diversity, Equity, Inclusion (DEI) policies in the federal government and the military.

After a strong opening statement by Subcommittee Chairman Senator Tommy Tuberville, the hearing eventually devolved into superficiality and boredom.

The same public pablum was dished out by each superintendent as they painted a strictly rosy picture of cadet and midshipmen morale, unity, academics, and the culture at their respective military institutions.

Each downplayed the disastrous effects of the DEI social engineering experiments mandated by the DoD over recent years at USMA, USAFA and USNA.

The hearing was bereft of any really aggressive cross-examination of the witnesses or very effective follow-up questions by Republican committee members. Except for the Democrats and their strident fulminations, the inquiry was maddeningly emotionless and no ‘sparks’ were sent flying in the committee room.

In addition to DEI, other serious problems have plagued these increasingly politicized military service academies including their academic curricula frequently infested with anti-Americanism and Critical Race Theory (CRT) messaging, the erosion of Honor Code standards, deteriorating Corps unity, favoritism in admissions policies, and a paucity of selfless and courageous leaders at the highest levels of their leadership, to name just a few.

The tenure of VADM Davids at the helm of USNA and Lieutenant General Tony Bauernfeind at USAFA began a relatively short time ago in 2024. Neither superintendent seemed eager to bring up or specifically address the Pentagon’s divisive social justice policies promoted by their predecessors and carried out under their own, albeit nascent, administrations.

However, since Lieutenant General Steven Gilland has a nearly three-year track record as USMA Superintendent and also once served as West Point’s Commandant of Cadets, he should be held accountable for his actions as its overseer. But Gilliand is also a graduate of the ‘rope-a-dope’ school of public speaking. He has always been adroit at deflecting probing questions or simply ignoring them.

One of the Republicans question Superintendent Bauernfeind about the same civilian associate professor at USAFA, Lynne Chandler Garcia, made reference to by Sen. Tuberville in his preliminary remarks. In a 2021 Washington Post op-ed Garcia publicly boasted about teaching CRT in her political science class because it was “vital” to cadets to understand the “structural racism” in America.

When Bauernfeind was asked directly if Ms. Garcia was still on the USAFA faculty four years later in 2025, his answer was “Yes.” The logical follow up question of “Why?” was never asked.

No committee members queried him about the “White boy no. 1 and no. 2” affair involving yet another USAFA civilian professor in the economics department, albeit under a previous superintendent.

Additionally, there was no curiosity from the Republicans about the band of purple rope-wearing cadets that had been circulating around the USAFA campus for several years ‘educating’ cadets about DEI before President Trump came into office. Having been specially ‘trained’ (indoctrinated), this group of cadets also reported up through a separate chain of command at the academy.

It was another opportunity missed to publicly expose the infiltration of divisive DEI/CRT Marxist ideologies at play at the Air Force Academy.

VADM Davids’ testimony about the state of affairs at Annapolis and going forward into the future was upbeat and pollyannaish to the point of being ridiculous. Her myopic view of the Naval Academy casts doubt on whether she has taken a hard look at her own institution and made an objective assessment of the culture there after years of harmful DEI social justice policies, including during her own brief tenure as superintendent.

The stony demeanor of USMA Superintendent Steven Gilland was not effectively pierced by any of the Republican senators. A few senators, namely Rick Scott, Ted Budd and Dan Sullivan, gave it a try – mostly on matters of the curriculum. One wonders if there was some preplanned coordination between them along this line of questioning.

Like his predecessor, retired General Darryl Williams, Superintendent Gilland is well practiced in effectively stonewalling questions from any source (including FOIAs from members of Congress and Judicial Watch), dodging inquiries from academy graduates, obfuscating, and putting his own spin on the facts.

Here was a golden opportunity to explore Gilland’s role in his willing enforcement at West Point of DoD DEI policies under the Biden administration. Like other careerists, Superintendent Gilland has been looking out for himself and always eager to toe the line of political correctness.

No Republican senator substantially held Gilland’s feet to the fire on any particular line of their questioning.

Not one senator challenged Gilland to explain his decision in 2024 to remove the words “duty, honor, country” from USMA’s mission statement. No one asked him to identify the “leaders in the academy and the external stakeholders” he worked with for the statement revision.

Where were the questions about his move to make West Point’s venerated Honor Code “aspirational”, rather than a foundational part of the academy’s ethos?

How about the promotion of DEI/CRT ideologies reflected in the courses of numerous academic departments under his watch, despite his denials?

Are we to believe his statement that out of over 600 academic courses reviewed, only two had to be eliminated as not being compliant with current federal government policy?

If the plan was to confront him over the curriculum issue, it was only partially successful because Gilland is so adept at evading answers to pointed questions and running out the time clock for individual senator’s questions.

Other areas the senators could have explored with Gilland, but didn’t, are why neither he nor his predecessor has publicly discussed the punishment ultimately meted out to cadets involved in a fentanyl overdose scandal during spring break in Florida in 2022, or the long virtual coverup of facts regarding the theft of a watch from the base PX some years ago.

A cadet who was a member of USMA’s football team, was filmed on security cameras stealing the item from the store, but he received his commission and graduated anyway. This last incident has rankled previous graduates for years.

No superintendent has publicly commented on this except to deny knowledge of it at periodic class reunions and other occasions when someone had the temerity to attempt to ask him about it.

It wasn’t immediately obvious what the strategic game plan was for the Republicans to elicit significant and useful information from the superintendents. It didn’t seem to be asking really tough or ‘uncomfortable’ questions of these leaders.

Perhaps it was to focus narrowly on just a few subjects and surrender some of these other topics as past ‘water over the dam.’ A broader approach might have helped to establish a pattern and better highlighted a myriad of problems afflicting the service academies.

The standard bearer for the Democratic committee members was Ranking Member Elizabeth Warren. She repeatedly hammered home her party’s view of diversity as the ‘greatest strength’ of the military, relentlessly expressed her outrage over the Trump administration’s roll-back of LGBTQ programs and DEI related policies in the services, and decried the elimination of some academy ‘affinity’ clubs. This last she viewed as a mortal blow to campus social inclusion, the well-being of cadets and future candidate recruitment.

Several of her colleagues also chimed in with their own harangues and statements of indignation. Senator Hirono read a rambling diatribe of her own complaints against the Republicans and the new administration.

Adding insult to injury at the conclusion of the hearing, Sen. Tuberville carried on about student athletes at the academies postponing their military service commitments and moving on to the professional sports’ leagues, effectively cashing in on their physical skills rather than immediately serving their country. So much for patriotism!

In the end, the SASC event promised a lot but delivered very little except yet another dull and disappointing hearing on Capitol Hill. The American public and our service members deserved better. They didn’t get it from many of our elected representatives on March 26, 2025 in Washington, D.C.

_
Colleen Roberts is the author of No Surrender: The New Patriots in the Battle for America

---

Senate Hearing on Status of Military Service Academies – March 26, 2025