Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's proposal to reduce the number of admirals and generals by 20 percent is encountering resistance on Capitol Hill, where key Senate Republicans are demanding more details and Democrats are labeling the move a politically motivated purge.
Several defense-focused senators said they have yet to receive a substantive rationale from the Pentagon. "No, I certainly want to see his rationale in detail, and I don't have that yet," Sen. Ted Budd (R-N.C.) told reporters when asked whether the cuts would benefit the military. Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.) deflected questions, saying, "We are focused [on] what we are doing today." Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) avoided the topic entirely, reciting lines from Tennyson's "Ulysses" when approached Wednesday.
Democrats were more direct in their condemnation. Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), a former CIA analyst, described the plan as a "purge" and said it is already damaging morale inside the Pentagon. "What I've been hearing from people inside the department is just how bad morale is. How many folks in uniform, extremely promising people, who are people of color or women just feel like there's no way they'll ever get ahead; that they'll always be perceived as a DEI case, no matter how fantastic a job they do," Slotkin said.
Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), the ranking member on the Armed Services Committee, warned Tuesday that the cuts would "add further disruption and confusion to the military forces, and he offered no framework for his decision. It seemed to be arbitrary, and it's going to cause harm rather than help [the] military." Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) called the approach "very draconian."
Hegseth publicly confirmed the plan during a 52-minute speech Wednesday to active-duty officers at Marine Corps Base Quantico in Virginia, where he also unveiled an autonomous warfare command initiative. He argued the restructuring—affecting senior leadership across the Army, Navy, and Air Force—is overdue. "Now the media calls that a purge. I call it accountability and long overdue, and frankly, the bare minimum. As usual, what the media levels as an accusation, I wear as an accomplishment," Hegseth said. "You see, you can't change a culture with the same people who enabled it. Personnel is policy at every single level."
The service branches have been directed to implement the reductions by January 1 of next year, with some positions downgraded rather than eliminated. The move follows a 10 percent cut to general officers last year and the firing or forced departure of more than two dozen senior military officers since Hegseth took over the Pentagon. He has also blocked dozens of promotions, drawing pushback from Democrats, some Republicans, and former defense officials.
Some Republicans offered measured support. Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), a former Navy radarman and Trump ally, said he had not seen the plan but added, "as a general rule, I think most organizations have become top-heavy, and so I think as part of what he's doing to look and make sure we have the most efficient military, we don't waste our money."
Still, other GOP senators voiced frustration. Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) said he learned of the cuts from news reports and had not been briefed by the Pentagon. "I don't know what his plan is," Rounds said. A Senate Republican source told The Hill that there is "great concern on the Hill that the secretary is not being upfront with the president" and that Hegseth has put Trump "in a very bad place with Iran."
Slotkin suggested that Republican discontent remains largely private. "I mean, I think there's a lot of frustration under the surface, but there's a big difference between private frustration and public courage," she said. She pointed to GOP candidates like former Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) who have called for an end to the U.S. war against Iran.
The personnel shake-up comes as the Pentagon under Hegseth has also pursued a new military megabase and other major reforms. Hegseth's allies insist he does not consider race or gender in personnel decisions and that military leaders serve at the pleasure of the president. In his speech, Hegseth framed the cuts as a message to the rank and file: "Last year's speech was not for those generals. It was for you, the backbone of our force, the current and future leaders on the front lines."
