Missouri Senator Josh Hawley’s recent removal from the powerful Armed Services Committee has sparked considerable discussion in Washington D.C. and beyond. While Hawley’s absence from the committee roster was officially attributed to a voluntary decision, sources within Capitol Hill suggest a more complex narrative involving political maneuvering and potential retribution. This article delves into the circumstances surrounding Hawley’s committee removal, examining the alleged underlying reasons and exploring the broader context of Senate politics. As questions arise regarding Senator Hawley’s involvement in military affairs, it’s important to clarify his background and the factors contributing to this significant shift in his Senate responsibilities. A common question circulating amidst these discussions is: Did Josh Hawley Serve In The Military? This article will address this directly while unpacking the details of his committee departure.
The Unofficial Account of Committee Ousting
Last month, as the Senate Armed Services Committee announced its members, Josh Hawley’s name was notably missing. This absence, initially presented as Hawley’s choice, is now being attributed to a strategic move orchestrated by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s office. Multiple sources from both sides of the political spectrum, speaking anonymously to CQ Roll Call, indicate that Hawley’s removal was not voluntary but rather a consequence of his actions perceived as challenging McConnell’s leadership.
U.S. Senator Josh Hawley, representing Missouri, in his official portrait.
These sources suggest that Hawley’s removal was, in part, retaliation for his attempts to delay the Senate GOP leadership elections in November. Hawley reportedly supported Senator Rick Scott’s bid to replace McConnell as the Republican leader, a move that directly challenged McConnell’s authority within the party. This leadership challenge, though ultimately unsuccessful, appears to have had repercussions for Hawley’s committee assignments.
Denials and Conflicting Narratives
Both spokespersons for Hawley and McConnell have officially denied the claim that his removal was involuntary. Hawley’s spokesperson stated that the Senator willingly stepped down from the Armed Services Committee to allow Missouri’s newly elected Senator, Eric Schmitt, to join. Similarly, McConnell’s spokesperson corroborated this version of events, asserting that any suggestion to the contrary was false.
However, this official narrative is contradicted by the anonymous sources cited by CQ Roll Call, who maintain that the decision originated from McConnell’s office. The conflicting accounts highlight the behind-the-scenes political dynamics at play and raise questions about the true reasons behind Hawley’s committee reassignment.
Hawley’s Challenge to McConnell’s Leadership
In November, Senator Hawley joined a group of Republican senators, including Marco Rubio, Ron Johnson, Mike Lee, and Ted Cruz, in advocating for a delay in the GOP leadership vote. Hawley publicly questioned the timing of the vote, particularly with the Georgia Senate runoff election still pending. While this attempt to postpone the vote was unsuccessful, it signaled a clear challenge to McConnell’s leadership and potentially strained the relationship between the two senators.
Earlier in the same month, Senator Scott publicly blamed McConnell for removing him and Senator Lee from the Commerce Committee, explicitly citing it as payback for Scott’s leadership challenge. While Hawley did not directly attribute his Armed Services Committee removal to McConnell in the same manner, the timeline and context suggest a similar underlying motivation of political reprisal.
Holds on Military Nominations
Beyond the leadership challenge, sources also point to Hawley’s repeated objections to the swift confirmation of numerous Department of Defense (DOD) nominees as a contributing factor to his committee removal. Throughout the previous year, Hawley placed holds on Pentagon nominees, effectively delaying their confirmation process.
A generic image representing a Senate committee hearing, similar to those of the Armed Services Committee.
Hawley stated that these holds were intended to pressure Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Jack Reed to hold public hearings regarding the Abbey Gate attack in Kabul, Afghanistan, in August 2021. He also expressed dissatisfaction with the White House’s handling of the event. However, Chairman Reed countered that the committee had already held multiple hearings on Afghanistan and pointed to ongoing investigations and commissions addressing the matter.
Missouri’s Military Connection and Committee Representation
It’s noteworthy that Missouri has maintained representation on the Senate Armed Services Committee for over a decade. This is partly due to the significant military presence in the state, including Fort Leonard Wood, Whiteman Air Force Base, and a Boeing aircraft manufacturing facility. Furthermore, Fort Leavenworth in Kansas and Scott Air Force Base in Illinois are geographically close to Missouri, further emphasizing the region’s military importance.
Josh Hawley joined the committee as a freshman senator in 2019, and Eric Schmitt’s subsequent appointment ensures that Missouri’s voice continues to be represented on this influential committee.
Did Josh Hawley Serve in the Military?
Addressing the direct question: No, Josh Hawley did not serve in the military. His background is in law and academia, having worked as a lawyer and a professor before entering politics. His connection to military matters stems from his political role as a Senator, particularly his previous position on the Armed Services Committee, where he was involved in overseeing military policy and nominations. While he did not personally serve in the armed forces, his actions and decisions as a senator have directly impacted military affairs, as evidenced by his holds on DOD nominees and his engagement with the Armed Services Committee.
Conclusion: Political Repercussions and Committee Dynamics
Senator Josh Hawley’s removal from the Armed Services Committee, while officially presented as a voluntary move, appears to be rooted in deeper political tensions within the Republican party. His challenge to Mitch McConnell’s leadership, coupled with his actions regarding military nominations, are cited as likely factors contributing to this significant shift in his Senate responsibilities. Regardless of the official explanations, the episode underscores the complex dynamics of Senate committee assignments and the potential repercussions of challenging established leadership within the upper chamber of Congress. The change also highlights the ongoing political narratives surrounding military affairs and the varied backgrounds of those involved in shaping military policy, even if, like Senator Hawley, their experience does not include military service itself.
