House Armed Services Committee Democrats

House Armed Services Committee Democrats Oversees and funds the Department of Defense, the United States Armed Forces, and portions of the De The House Armed Services Committee is responsible for funding and oversight of the Department of Defense (DOD), the United States Armed Forces, and portions of the Department of Energy.

The Chairman is Congressman Adam Smith from Washington's 9th district.

Last month, the unemployment rate among U.S. veterans reached its lowest level in more than two years.This Administratio...
01/07/2022
Veterans unemployment drops to lowest level in two years

Last month, the unemployment rate among U.S. veterans reached its lowest level in more than two years.

This Administration and Congress are delivering results for the backbone of our national security: our service members, veterans, and their families.

The 3.2% jobless rate in December was the lowest mark since the start of the coronavirus pandemic.

We must not let anyone rewrite the history of what happened in our nation’s Capitol one year ago on #January6th.The trut...
01/06/2022

We must not let anyone rewrite the history of what happened in our nation’s Capitol one year ago on #January6th.

The truth matters — and the January 6th Committee is finding it for the American people.

I have said it many times, and it is no more true or real than when we think about the events of January 6: We are in a battle for the soul of America.

A battle that by the grace of God, and by the goodness and greatness of this nation, we will win.

Nevada gains with House passage of defense bill
12/27/2021
Nevada gains with House passage of defense bill

Nevada gains with House passage of defense bill

A compromise $740 billion defense bill that includes a pay hike for military personnel and programs at Nevada installations was passed by the House on Tuesday.

NEW: Rep. Adam Smith issued the following statement after the #FY22NDAA was signed into law for the 61st consecutive yea...
12/27/2021

NEW: Rep. Adam Smith issued the following statement after the #FY22NDAA was signed into law for the 61st consecutive year by President Biden.

Read his full statement: https://armedservices.house.gov/2021/12/smith-statement-as-the-fy22-ndaa-is-signed-into-law

NEW: Rep. Adam Smith issued the following statement after the #FY22NDAA was signed into law for the 61st consecutive year by President Biden.

Read his full statement: https://armedservices.house.gov/2021/12/smith-statement-as-the-fy22-ndaa-is-signed-into-law

12/25/2021

May you have a safe, warm and happy holiday season!

We must protect those who protect us from insider threats and the threat of violent extremism.That’s why the actions at ...
12/20/2021
Pentagon issues rules aimed at stopping rise of extremism | AP News

We must protect those who protect us from insider threats and the threat of violent extremism.

That’s why the actions at the Department of Defense announced by Secretary Austin today are so important for our national security.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Warning that extremism in the ranks is increasing, Pentagon officials are issuing detailed new rules prohibiting service members from actively engaging in extremist activities. The new guidelines come nearly a year after some current and former service members participated in the...

The #FY22NDAA makes historic policy changes that will benefit our service members and their families, including a packag...
12/13/2021

The #FY22NDAA makes historic policy changes that will benefit our service members and their families, including a package of bold reforms that will deliver accountability, independence, and results for survivors of s*xual assault in the U.S. military.

Get the facts: https://armedservices.house.gov/2021/12/the-facts-delivering-real-reforms-to-address-the-military-s*xual-assault-crisis

The #FY22NDAA makes historic policy changes that will benefit our service members and their families, including a package of bold reforms that will deliver accountability, independence, and results for survivors of s*xual assault in the U.S. military.

Get the facts: https://armedservices.house.gov/2021/12/the-facts-delivering-real-reforms-to-address-the-military-s*xual-assault-crisis

12/13/2021

I’m joining House Armed Services Committee Democrats & my House Appropriations Committee colleagues in wishing the National Guard a Happy Birthday! 🎈

National Guard service members continue to protect our communities and lend disaster relief support across the country.

From COVID-19 response to disaster relief and much more, members of The National Guard continue to protect and support c...
12/13/2021

From COVID-19 response to disaster relief and much more, members of The National Guard continue to protect and support communities across America.

As we celebrate the National Guard's birthday today, we honor those who have served our country in the Guard.

From COVID-19 response to disaster relief and much more, members of The National Guard continue to protect and support communities across America.

As we celebrate the National Guard's birthday today, we honor those who have served our country in the Guard.

12/10/2021
What They Are Saying: FY22 NDAA Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Reforms Receive High Praise from Advocates

Major reforms in the #FY22NDAA will deliver accountability, independence, and justice for survivors of s*xual assault in the U.S. military.

Here’s what leading experts and advocates are saying about these reforms:

What They Are Saying: FY22 NDAA Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) Reforms Receive High Praise from Advocates December 10, 2021 WASHINGTON, D.C. – This week, the House of Representatives passed S. 1605, the bipartisan, bicameral text of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)....

NEW: Rep. Adam Smith issued a statement on how the bipartisan, bicameral #FY22NDAA would deliver results for survivors o...
12/10/2021

NEW: Rep. Adam Smith issued a statement on how the bipartisan, bicameral #FY22NDAA would deliver results for survivors of s*xual assault and related crimes in the U.S. military.

Read his full statement: https://armedservices.house.gov/2021/12/smith-statement-on-the-fy22-ndaa-s-transformative-reforms-for-military-justice-and-accountability

NEW: Rep. Adam Smith issued a statement on how the bipartisan, bicameral #FY22NDAA would deliver results for survivors of s*xual assault and related crimes in the U.S. military.

Read his full statement: https://armedservices.house.gov/2021/12/smith-statement-on-the-fy22-ndaa-s-transformative-reforms-for-military-justice-and-accountability

NEW: By a vote of 363-70, the House of Representatives has passed S. 1605 — the #FY22NDAA.The House will always support ...
12/08/2021

NEW: By a vote of 363-70, the House of Representatives has passed S. 1605 — the #FY22NDAA.

The House will always support our service members, their families, and America’s national security.

NEW: By a vote of 363-70, the House of Representatives has passed S. 1605 — the #FY22NDAA.

The House will always support our service members, their families, and America’s national security.

When we invest in our service members, we’re investing in America’s national security.That’s why the #FY22NDAA supports ...
12/08/2021

When we invest in our service members, we’re investing in America’s national security.

That’s why the #FY22NDAA supports a well-deserved pay raise for those serving in uniform: armedservices.house.gov/ndaa

When we invest in our service members, we’re investing in America’s national security.

That’s why the #FY22NDAA supports a well-deserved pay raise for those serving in uniform: armedservices.house.gov/ndaa

The #FY22NDAA invests in what makes America strong: our diversity, our technological innovation, our alliances and partn...
12/08/2021

The #FY22NDAA invests in what makes America strong: our diversity, our technological innovation, our alliances and partnerships, and those who serve in uniform.

The #FY22NDAA invests in what makes America strong: our diversity, our technological innovation, our alliances and partnerships, and those who serve in uniform.

BREAKING: The House of Representatives has started debate on S. 1605, the #FY22NDAA.Watch live: live.house.govLearn more...
12/08/2021

BREAKING: The House of Representatives has started debate on S. 1605, the #FY22NDAA.

Watch live: live.house.gov

Learn more about how this year’s NDAA meets America’s biggest defense challenges: armedservices.house.gov/ndaa

BREAKING: The House of Representatives has started debate on S. 1605, the #FY22NDAA.

Watch live: live.house.gov

Learn more about how this year’s NDAA meets America’s biggest defense challenges: armedservices.house.gov/ndaa

The s*xual assault crisis in our military is simply unacceptable.The #FY22NDAA will deliver justice for survivors by ref...
12/07/2021

The s*xual assault crisis in our military is simply unacceptable.

The #FY22NDAA will deliver justice for survivors by reforming the Uniform Code of Military Justice to ensure that qualified independent prosecutors take on s*xual assault cases.

The s*xual assault crisis in our military is simply unacceptable.

The #FY22NDAA will deliver justice for survivors by reforming the Uniform Code of Military Justice to ensure that qualified independent prosecutors take on s*xual assault cases.

NEW: Rep. Adam Smith and the other leaders of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees have released the text of a...
12/07/2021

NEW: Rep. Adam Smith and the other leaders of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees have released the text of an agreement they have reached on the #FY22NDAA.

Learn more: https://armedservices.house.gov/2021/12/hasc-sasc-release-text-of-fy22-ndaa-agreement

NEW: Rep. Adam Smith and the other leaders of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees have released the text of an agreement they have reached on the #FY22NDAA.

Learn more: https://armedservices.house.gov/2021/12/hasc-sasc-release-text-of-fy22-ndaa-agreement

Today marks 80 years since more than 2,400 Americans died in the attack on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii.This Pearl Harbor Rememb...
12/07/2021

Today marks 80 years since more than 2,400 Americans died in the attack on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii.

This Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day, we honor their memory and the legacy of America's World War II veterans.

Today marks 80 years since more than 2,400 Americans died in the attack on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii.

This Pearl Harbor Remembrance Day, we honor their memory and the legacy of America's World War II veterans.

Watch live throughout today as Chairman Rep. Adam Smith, Rep. Jim Cooper, U.S. Representative Chrissy Houlahan, and Rep....
12/04/2021

Watch live throughout today as Chairman Rep. Adam Smith, Rep. Jim Cooper, U.S. Representative Chrissy Houlahan, and Rep. Jason Crow discuss the future of America's national security priorities at #RNDF2021.

Learn more: https://www.reaganfoundation.org/reagan-institute/programs/reagan-national-defense-forum/

Watch live throughout today as Chairman Rep. Adam Smith, Rep. Jim Cooper, U.S. Representative Chrissy Houlahan, and Rep. Jason Crow discuss the future of America's national security priorities at #RNDF2021.

Learn more: https://www.reaganfoundation.org/reagan-institute/programs/reagan-national-defense-forum/

HAPPENING NOW: Congressman John Garamendi chairs a hearing of the Subcommittee on Readiness about the nexus between oper...
12/02/2021

HAPPENING NOW: Congressman John Garamendi chairs a hearing of the Subcommittee on Readiness about the nexus between operational energy and logistics.

📺 Tune in: https://armedservices.house.gov/2021/12/subcommittee-on-readiness-hearing-minding-the-gap-how-operational-energy-can-help-us-address-logistics-challenges

HAPPENING NOW: Congressman John Garamendi chairs a hearing of the Subcommittee on Readiness about the nexus between operational energy and logistics.

📺 Tune in: https://armedservices.house.gov/2021/12/subcommittee-on-readiness-hearing-minding-the-gap-how-operational-energy-can-help-us-address-logistics-challenges

As we near the end of National Veterans and Military Families Month, we are so proud that the House’s version of the #FY...
11/29/2021

As we near the end of National Veterans and Military Families Month, we are so proud that the House’s version of the #FY22NDAA helps meet the needs of our service members, veterans, and their families.

As we near the end of National Veterans and Military Families Month, we are so proud that the House’s version of the #FY22NDAA helps meet the needs of our service members, veterans, and their families.

This week, President Biden and Dr. Biden joined U.S. service members at Fort Bragg for a Thanksgiving celebration.This h...
11/23/2021
Biden celebrates 'Friendsgiving' with Fort Bragg service members and their families

This week, President Biden and Dr. Biden joined U.S. service members at Fort Bragg for a Thanksgiving celebration.

This holiday season, we’re honoring those serving in uniform and their families.

President Joe Biden and first lady Jill Biden traveled to Fort Bragg, North Carolina, on Monday afternoon to hold a "Friendsgiving" celebration with military service members and their families.

This National Veterans and Military Families Month, we celebrate and honor the service members, veterans, and families a...
11/22/2021

This National Veterans and Military Families Month, we celebrate and honor the service members, veterans, and families at the heart of America’s national security.

This National Veterans and Military Families Month, we celebrate and honor the service members, veterans, and families at the heart of America’s national security.

This National Veterans and Military Families Month, let’s remember that when we invest in our service members, veterans,...
11/17/2021

This National Veterans and Military Families Month, let’s remember that when we invest in our service members, veterans, and their families, we’re investing in America’s national security.

This National Veterans and Military Families Month, let’s remember that when we invest in our service members, veterans, and their families, we’re investing in America’s national security.

Chairman Rep. Adam Smith: Congresswoman Jackie Speier has served Californians, our men and women in uniform, and all Ame...
11/16/2021

Chairman Rep. Adam Smith: Congresswoman Jackie Speier has served Californians, our men and women in uniform, and all Americans with selfless honor and distinction as a Member of Congress and as a valued member of the House Armed Services Committee.

Read his full statement: https://armedservices.house.gov/2021/11/smith-statement-on-the-retirement-of-congresswoman-jackie-speier

Chairman Rep. Adam Smith: Congresswoman Jackie Speier has served Californians, our men and women in uniform, and all Americans with selfless honor and distinction as a Member of Congress and as a valued member of the House Armed Services Committee.

Read his full statement: https://armedservices.house.gov/2021/11/smith-statement-on-the-retirement-of-congresswoman-jackie-speier

NEW: "The American people deserve a responsible assessment and response to this event." Read Chairman Rep. Adam Smith's ...
11/16/2021

NEW: "The American people deserve a responsible assessment and response to this event." Read Chairman Rep. Adam Smith's full statement on Russia's test of an anti-satellite missile, which created a dangerous debris field in space: https://armedservices.house.gov/2021/11/smith-statement-on-russian-anti-satellite-test

NEW: "The American people deserve a responsible assessment and response to this event." Read Chairman Rep. Adam Smith's full statement on Russia's test of an anti-satellite missile, which created a dangerous debris field in space: https://armedservices.house.gov/2021/11/smith-statement-on-russian-anti-satellite-test

U.S. allies and partners play a critical role in strengthening America’s defense — and the #FY22NDAA makes crucial inves...
11/11/2021
US Indo-Pacific Command chief in Japan, reaffirms commitment

U.S. allies and partners play a critical role in strengthening America’s defense — and the #FY22NDAA makes crucial investments in their success:

TOKYO (AP) — The head of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command on Thursday met with Japan's Prime Minister Fumio Kishida and reaffirmed America's commitment to achieving a free and open Indo-Pacific despite rising tensions amid China's increasingly assertive military actions.

This Veterans Day, we thank all who have served the United States in uniform with honor. Our service members and their f...
11/11/2021

This Veterans Day, we thank all who have served the United States in uniform with honor. Our service members and their families are the heart and soul of America’s defense.

This Veterans Day, we thank all who have served the United States in uniform with honor. Our service members and their families are the heart and soul of America’s defense.

Photos from Congressman Salud Carbajal's post
11/10/2021

Photos from Congressman Salud Carbajal's post

Photos from Rep. Ruben Gallego's post
11/10/2021

Photos from Rep. Ruben Gallego's post

Today, we celebrate 246 years of the U.S. Marine Corps.246 years of service by generations of Marines and their families...
11/10/2021

Today, we celebrate 246 years of the U.S. Marine Corps.

246 years of service by generations of Marines and their families — and 246 years of #SemperFi.

Today, we celebrate 246 years of the U.S. Marine Corps.

246 years of service by generations of Marines and their families — and 246 years of #SemperFi.

Address

Washington D.C., DC

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when House Armed Services Committee Democrats posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Videos

Nearby government services


Comments

Hello members of Congress, I am curious why, after all the issues this country has been experiencing on all levels of law enforcement, we have not seen any push from either party to implement a Uniform Code of Police Justice, similar in nature to the UCMJ that holds military members to highest standards of conduct? I think this type of legislation would provide a viable solution as opposed to simply defunding police departments, and may find support amongst both sides of the aisle. - V/r, IT1 Kurt Davidson
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/history-wont-forget-us-navy-captain-brett-crozier-gloria-j-schramm His humanity scared them! Maybe one day he’ll be back onboard!
Over the last few weeks, fellow veterans and I have had discussions about the events surrounding the disappearance and death of soldier Vanessa Guillen’s at Fort Hood Tx. We are appalled, ashamed, embarrassed, and frankly fed up that the issue of s*xual harassment and assault persists in the U.S. Armed Services. As a Marine, I and my fellow brothers and sisters are told that our actions must be beyond reproach, whether out in town, on liberty, in garrison, or combat. It seems that the military as an institution, cannot uphold a standard it expects from its rank and file. When an organization such as the military cannot protect its members in the most basic manner, it is utterly disgraceful. The death and murder of Vanessa Guillen were preventable. The civilian and military leadership within the DOD have demonstrated an inability to handle accusations and investigations of s*xual harassment or assault. These are not new problems; in 1991, as a young teenager, I remember seeing the news reports of the Tailhook scandal. Fast forward nineteen years later, a Soldier who was afraid to report s*xual harassment is now dead, likely murdered by the harassing individual! At this point, I believe The House and Senate Armed Services Committees should hold hearings and have the civilian and military leadership at the DOD, account for why they have allowed this problem to fester. Additionally, Vanessa Guillen’s chain of command, starting with her Company First Sergeant and Company Commander and up to the Command Sergeant Major and Commanding General of Fort Hood, should testify and account for their actions or inactions, regarding this matter. The failure to properly investigate this incident is a failure of command at every level at Fort Hood. This failure is no different than failure to properly investigate the killing of civilians in Haditha, Iraq, in Nov. 2005. I believe that the DOD and the respective branches of the armed services can no longer be entrusted with handling s*xual harassment or assault accusations and investigations. Congress should immediately call for an outside law enforcement agency, the FBI, to take over all aspects of current and future investigations into s*xual harassment or assault accusations. Furthermore, if investigations find credible evidence of s*xual harassment or assault, that evidence should be turned over to the U.S. District Attorney for prosecution. Time and time again in incidents involving s*xual harassment or assault, the military has demonstrated an inability to handle the situation appropriately. It seems the chain of command is more concerned about the optics and/or how it will affect the careers or advancement of senior enlisted or officers. It is because of this self-interest and/or selfishness within a chain of command that all investigations concerning s*xual harassment or assault must be conducted by an independent law enforcement agency and prosecuted by a U.S. District Attorney.
Why did you do this? As Democrats, we are furious! YOU need to take care of our wildlife and prioritize them FIRST. I will help to vote you all out of office. We will not tolerate the military taking priority over our wildlife!
U.S. Arms sales to Saudi Arabia via a #PresidentialVeto seems to have been swept under the rug in the main stream media, along with the obviously nefarious reason the Kurds were thrown under the bus. DEFENSENEWS.COM By: Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― The U.S. State Department inspector general was investigating the Trump administration’s use of an emergency declaration to sell weapons to Saudi Arabia, the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee said Monday. President Donald Trump announced late Friday that he was firing Steve Linick, the inspector general since 2013, which sparked a backlash from Democrats, who suggested Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was responsible for what “may be an illegal act of retaliation.” New York Rep. Eliot Engel, the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, tweeted on Monday that Linick’s “office was investigating — at my request — Trump’s phony emergency declaration so he could send Saudi Arabia weapons. We don’t have the full picture yet, but it’s troubling that Sec Pompeo wanted Linick pushed out.” Trump, in May 2019, declared an emergency under the Arms Export Control Act to bypass Congress and expedite $8.1 billion in weapon sales for Saudi Arabia, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates. At the time, Pompeo said the sales were needed “to deter further the malign influence of the Government of Iran throughout the Middle East region.” Lawmakers were delaying the sales over humanitarian concerns, and Democrats pushed back over what they saw as overreach by the executive branch. In June 2019, 26 Democrats asked Linick to investigate the declaration, calling the justification for for it “dubious.” In the wake of the death of journalist Jamal Khashoggi ― who the American intelligence community says was murdered in the Saudi consulate in Turkey under orders by the Saudi kingdom ― Congress passed a series of measures on a bipartisan basis aimed at curbing U.S. support for Riyadh’s involvement in Yemen’s civil war. Trump vetoed the measures and the Senate failed to override. https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/05/18/fired-state-department-ig-probed-trumps-saudi-arms-deals/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=EBB%2005.19.20&utm_term=Editorial%20-%20Military%20-%20Early%20Bird%20Brief
As a Veteran, I think that we should honor our heros by naming our bases after the Congressional Metal of Honor recipients. There has been 3520 recipients dating back from the Civil War to Present.
If you need a P.C. name for a military installation, how about Fort Audie Murphy?
@PFPAOfficial An Agency Plagued by Systemic Deep Rooted Racism and Corruption Considering an Agency whose core mission boast “Protecting Those Who Protect Our Nation”, one would never expect that the very individuals that do the protecting would in fact need the protection the most, from management. An Agency that prides itself on prestige and being our nation’s premiere law enforcement agency but in reality that could not be further from the truth. The Agency that I am referencing is the United States Pentagon Police Department under the Pentagon Force Protection Agency (PFPA). An Agency that is more concerned with covering up corruption than exposing the truth. In reality the Agency a whole is extremely top heavy and lacks the proper leadership to actually stand up to such high claims of excellence. I write this article today to make known to all that read this the very abuse of power, waste of resources, and corruption that has affected so many individuals that put forth tireless efforts day in and day out to keep the people of the Pentagon safe. At this point there are no boundaries as to how low management will sink with their tactics of bullying individuals, which want nothing more than to make an honest living and career while providing a service to the people of our nation. Needless to say, upper management is very much aware of the bullying and harassment in the workplace. They have done next to nothing outside of releasing agency memos which are absolutely useless when combating the problem. You have to ask, how can someone fully focus on the mission at hand when you have to constantly watch for the threat that you may never see coming (management)? PFPA, an agency that has gotten so bold with their effort to destroy people’s livelihood that they no longer care to hide it. The amount of careers that PFPA has unjustly ended and lives ruined unjustly is absolutely alarming. All the while, the PFPA managers and the Pentagon Police Department (PPD) command staff walk around unaccountable for their negligent actions. With a Deputy Chief that has been cited for assault charges while in uniform and on duty against another officer, or a Major that had an affair with an officer and his wife was made aware and brought these issues to the workplace in an outrageous manner, or even a Captain that has a history of assaulting his wife on a number of occasions, all of which the agency is aware of, you’d think that the agency would be a little more open minded and understanding. If officers had committed those acts, they would have surely been terminated, no questions asked. The agency wastes a great deal of money having Sergeants and Lieutenants working in positions that could easily be performed by a non-police civilian at a GS-05 grade level. The racism, bigotry, and discrimination that rocks the very core of this Agency would astonish anyone that has two eyes to see and two ears to hear. It is extremely blatant. Racism has run rampant for a number of years and it continues to grow. Currently, it’s the worse that it’s ever been. The fact that the command staff punishes people of color at a much higher rate and more aggressively than any other race or the fact that the punishment themselves are much more severe in nature is evidence of that fact. This very conduct has grown into a culture and creates an immense racial divide. It even appears that new supervisors that are promoted are indoctrinated into the fact that people of color in the agency are held to a much different standard. The select few that actually decide to step up against this culture soon get a quick reality check of just how deep the culture of racism truly is. These individuals are usually targeted and management doesn’t stop until they achieve their desired goal. This leaves the individual feeling as though their only option is to leave. That in turn leads to emotional distress. Many people of color are passed over for promotions or assignments that they so rightfully deserve, all to keep up with a particular agenda. Most are forced to take the time out of their day and money out of their pockets to hire a lawyer to sue the agency. The sad truth is that a large percentage of the time, if they had to sue to get that position, it’s almost a guarantee that the agency makes certain that they aren’t promoted again in the future. Who wants the burden of constantly having to sue to move up in an Agency that clearly doesn’t have your best interest in mind? The Agency has a history of promoting or moving white officers or supervisors into key positions without publicly advertising it for all to have a fair chance to apply. I’ve lost count how many times supervisors have covered up and swept under the rug incidents that have happened to non-people of color and literally crucified people of color for very similar incidents of a less serious nature. White officers have made racist comments and either gotten an extremely light punishment or no punishment at all. I feel that people of color have suffered for far too long not to have management answer for these heinous actions that they’ve put forth and receive at least a little bit of justice. Working there under these conditions reminds me of what black agents must have had to endure working under J. Edgar Hoover. Fair and equal treatment should be applied evenly across the board no matter the color of your skin. When officers follow the proper channels to report such unwanted conduct and behavior, the incidents never seem to receive the proper attention that’s due. There’s a common perception amongst black officers that white supervisors almost never receive discipline and that going through the process of reporting them is a complete waste of time. Again, it's gotten to a point where it’s either endure it or leave. If a person of color gets disciplined, the justice is much more swift but if a non-person of color does the same thing, an investigation drags on for so long to the point where most just simply forget about it. In some cases, they are even promoted and still receive bonuses. The policy is supposed to prohibit individuals that have been involved or currently involved in any sort of internal investigation or disciplinary action from being promoted but white officers and supervisors aren’t held to that standard. There is a pattern of white supervisors covering up the wrong doings of white officers when black officers aren’t afforded that same luxury. When there’s an incident involving misconduct by a white supervisor the agency will hide them away at another work location for an undetermined amount of time “until the smoke clears”. I’ve seen it far too many times than I’d care to admit. How can subordinates have faith and trust in Agency management when they fail to follow their own rules that they’ve drafted and put in place? What happened to leading by example? As referenced previously, there are black supervisors that observe the extreme injustices that occur in the agency against people of color but they are powerless to stop it out of fear of the backlash and retaliation. The potential outcome of doing so includes being targeted, disciplinary action, and possible demotion. Black officers that are placed on light duty for various reasons are left in that status with no end in sight and no explanation as to what the extenuating circumstances are that keeps them in that status for so long. It’s clear to see that there’s a much higher number of black officers on light duty than any other race of officers. Is that a coincidence? It’s almost as if the agency parades some of them around as an example as to how much power the Agency has over your career and your life. The Agency management would like for individuals on the outside looking in to think that there are predominantly black officers suffering from health issues, or only black officers getting involved in incidents leading to disciplinary action to place them in a light duty status. That is simply not true. As stated before, black officers are held to a much higher standard altogether compared to their white counterparts. Some individuals are allowed to maintain their credentials including a DoD issued CAC but others aren’t. There just seems to be no consistency with the exception of getting a harsher than normal proposed suspension for being black. Getting off of light duty and returning to full duty status with the agency is indeed no easy task and literally takes an act of Congress. Waiting to be cleared can be a nightmare because there’s no actual guarantee that you will be cleared even when it’s medical related and it doesn’t affect your job performance. Being cleared by a licensed physician also affords no promises or guarantees that one will be cleared by the Agency. At that point the agency seems to do everything in their power to get rid of you. You’re considered damaged goods and a liability to them. It has become immediately apparent that the agency uses a tactic of utilizing the Recruitment, Medical, and Fitness Division (RMFD) and Medical Review Board (MRB) to remove people in lieu of conventional and lawful methods out of retaliation for opposing unlawful employment actions. Most officers decline to divulge when they’re injured due to the possibility of being placed on light duty. After alerting the agency, an officer would then be required to use a minimum of 40 hours of their own leave before the agency would attempt to find them a job. An interview of a veteran officer with tenure, confirmed this and some have even fell victim to this standard for a number of months or even year. The PFPA RMFD has a history of treating certain individual’s impairments or disabilities more favorably than others. Equality is greatly lacking in the process. It's very clear that the Agency promotes an environment of systemic racial and disability discrimination. There are other issues brewing in the Agency that extends beyond race such as bullying that was referenced earlier by supervisors and upper management that has also become commonplace and a culture of fear. These tactics are sure to turn a good officer into a bad or problematic officer. Officer discretion is nonexistent. It’s either the Agency’s way or no way at all. You rarely ever hear of anyone getting a simple warning or a write up. During disciplinary action proceedings, management starts from the absolute max penalty that they can pursue which is usually excessive from the start. Even on incidents such as drinking hot coffee on a cold day on post (this actually happened). When one speaks out, a target is instantly painted on their backs for all of management to continue to attack you. Your name is automatically tarnished and your reputation soiled. Some officers find themselves on a downward spiral with no hope of ever recovering. When you have vindictive supervisors and upper management, it’s not hard to see why. At a time when suicides are at an all-time high, offering the Employee Assistance Program is merely not enough especially when the agency that’s offering the anguish and grief is the cause of why an employee would need it in the first place. Most officers are simply just too afraid to utilize this service out of fear that the agency will in some way punish them for doing so by labeling them unfit for duty. The disciplinary action process as a whole needs to be completely revamped because it leaves far too much room for one deciding official to have an overwhelming effect on the outcome of your case. Why should one single individual have so much control and power on the outcome of your case, especially at his/her level of management. Those individuals usually hold the rank of Major. Under those circumstances there’s a large possibility that you won’t receive a fair and unbiased decision or outcome. Each official has their own set way of looking at circumstances. To sum it up, you can get five different deciding officials and there’s a good chance that each one will give you a different punishment. Some even pride themselves on being the executioner of careers and attempting to do everything in their power to make sure that the max penalty sticks. Management has garnered an environment, which promotes this type of behavior and it has sadly become an accepted standard or practice when dealing with subordinates. Management tends to forget that officers are people too and should be treated with at least a shred of dignity and respect the same as any other government employee. Many officers feel as though the agency will not have their back even if they are in the right. This will cause officers to second-guess their judgment and possibly think twice even though they know that a particular action needs to be taken. Those precious seconds could potentially cause the officers their lives. Why is it that when you’re suspended, you’re required to surrender your credentials, building pass, CAC, and even your parking pass? Is this same requirement applied fairly for all government employees or is this another example of PFPA overstepping their boundaries (like they’ve done in the past ) and going the extra mile to make you feel more disgraced than you already are by making you feel like you’re terminated. Is that standard applied regardless of the number of days that you’re placed on suspension? Having legal representation is an absolute must while employed with the Agency. An even bigger necessity if you're an officer of color. Especially considering that the Agency utilizes the PFPA Human Capital Program Management Division (PFPA HCPMD), Washington Headquarters Services Labor Management Employee Relations (WHS LMER), the Washington Headquarters Services Equal Employment Opportunity Programs (EEOP) Office and the WHS/PFPA Office of General Counsel (WHS/PFPA OGC). Entities whom would rather see the Agency waste tons of money and countless resources fighting your case, than doing what's right, and settling. It appears that the agency has the mentality that the officer will run out of money long before the agency will. The Agency relies on the fact that most officers won't have the money or resources to fight a possibly lengthy employment battle. Under those circumstances, the Agency has an easy win. The agency has what is referred to as punishment post. A punishment post is a post that’s usually undesirable by most officers but they’ll put officers at that very post if they don’t like them or as a form of harassment towards that officer. This is just one of the many tactics that supervisors utilize to make your life a living hell to get their point across! Boundary Channel Access Control Point and Corridor 2 are two post that immediately come to mind. There’s an immense number of people that frequent through these two locations. The probability for mistakes are higher and the repercussions are great. That makes for a greater deal of responsibility coupled with a higher level of stress with no room for mistakes, which is the reason that most officers avoid these post at all cost. Random Anti-Terrorism Measures (RAMs) are conducted at Corridor 2 that are completely ineffective. The RAMS are not random at all. Also the RAMS are only conducted on one side of the building. A great deal of employees will avoid participating by going through the Mall entrance. This was brought to management’s attention and they failed to address the situation. With insider threat on the rise, this poses a great threat to security. To make matters worse, they’ve consistently undermanned the post with two officers when an absolute minimum of three officers are needed in order for the post to operate smoothly and efficiently. At PFPA, there’s a number of officers that have been with the agency for a great number of years, which included the good and the bad times. Needless to say, those same officers are no longer “spring chickens”. They’ve aged and their bodies have as well. The things that once required little to no effort to do, now takes extra time. There’s no secret that PFPA has targeted those individuals. Many of which have been there since “DPS Days” referring to the Defense Protective Service which is the predecessor to the Pentagon Force Protection Agency Police. These officers have given their all over the years and to betray them in this way is a total slap to the face. The fitness standards were altered, although they were hired under a different standard in which some were passing annually. Now that the new standards are in place, a good percentage of them are failing. I feel as though those officers should at the very least be grandfathered in under a special waiver or exception. These are excellent officers that have lost the will because they feel as though the Agency has turned their backs on them. That along with unrealistic and ridiculously high medical standards reaffirms that feeling. Command staff are not held to the same high standards and are granted waivers when they’re unable to perform the basic requirements of their job. Operations officers are not granted that luxury. Morale is at an all time low and management has done nothing to change that situation at all. I feel as though a panel should be created to look into these issues as well as investigate hiring practices, promotion processes, discipline patterns, EEO complaints, and finally, circumstances into why the agency has such an alarming turnover rate. On average people leave the agency to accept jobs paying much less just to have a little peace of mind that they could never seem to obtain while employed with the agency. In some select instances some individuals leave to go to no job at all. I'm confident that this approach will yield an outcome that will confirm what I’ve stated above. This will ensure that all actions from that point will be impartial and fair. Ultimately, I feel that a full and thorough investigation needs to be opened by the Department of Justice to address multiple civil rights violations involving the agency. These issues needs to be addressed and corrected now before it gets much worse in the future. No longer should people of color have to feel oppressed at their workplace. My hopes are that bringing these unfortunate events to light will empower others to break free the chains of fear and empower them to report the wrongdoings that the agency has subjected them to unjustifiably and unconstitutionally. The major issues in the agency did not just magically disappear upon the former PFPA Director's departure. He is not the only official guilty of misusing his power and authority. The rash of suicides were merely scratching the surface of the immense magnitude of issues that this agency is anchored with. The agency has a strict habit of violating individuals civil rights and subjects the individuals whom opposes their malicious treatment to further harassment, bullying, and retaliation which can be further verified in the following cases: Milford R. v. Dep't of Defense, EEOC Appeal No. 0120120081 (December 3, 2015) Complainant timely filed an appeal from the Agency's October 4, 2011, final order concerning his equal employment opportunity (EEO) complaint alleging employment discrimination in violation of Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended, 29 U.S.C. 791 et seq. At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant worked as a Police Officer at the Pentagon. On June 2, 2009, Complainant filed an EEO complaint alleging that the Agency discriminated against him on the bases of disability (HIV infection) and reprisal for prior protected EEO activity. In the instant case, the EEOC found a dispute in the record as to whether a simple diagnosis of HIV requires additional screening and reassignment in the absence of objective evidence that the employee was having problems performing the essential functions of the job. The Rehabilitation Act places certain limitations on an employer's ability to make disability-related inquiries or require medical examinations of employees. The inquiry may be made or the examination ordered only if it is job-related and consistent with business necessity. The decision to require an Independent Medical Examination (IME) was even more questionable, in light of the Agency's Medical Officer's phone conversation with Complainant's physician, who informed the Agency that Complainant was in HIV Stage 1, and later followed up to report that he was followed every three months, that his CD4 and Viral Load counts had improved, and that he had had no side-effects with the medications. Despite this evidence in the record from Complainant's physician clearing him to work, the AJ credited the Agency's position, and found "no dispute" that Complainant failed to provide the relevant medical documentation. Confirming Complainant's own physician's opinion, the results of the IME recommended that Complainant be returned to full duty, as he had no opportunistic infections, and was fully able to perform his job without direct threat to anyone. Moreover, the EEOC did not find sufficient evidence to support the periodic testing of Complainant, since the Agency's own IME determined Complainant was not direct threat to anyone, nor was there any objective evidence he was having problems performing the essential functions of the job. Complainant also alleged that the Agency's contract physicians harassed him about his disability, and told him he should look for a new job, and become an activist. Based on a thorough review of the record and the contentions on appeal, including those not specifically addressed herein, the EEOC vacated the Agency's final order and remanded the matter in accordance with the issued order. Kenny C v. Dep't of Def., EEOC Appeal No. 0720150030 (Aug. 29, 2017) - Complainant filed a formal EEO complaint alleging, among other things, that the Agency discriminated against him when it did not select him for an Assistant Special Agent in Charge position. Following a hearing, the AJ found that the Agency failed to articulate a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for Complainant's non-selection. While the Agency asserted that Complainant was not promoted because he did not pass an annual physical fitness exam, Agency managers testified that the supervisory position would involve more administrative work than Complainant's position and there would not be a substantial change in the physical requirements. Further, the AJ noted that the selection criteria was changed for one candidate who did not meet the requirements but not for Complainant. Complainant also stated that the Director, who was extensively involved in the selection yet did not testify at the hearing, made several comments that revealed a discriminatory intent. The AJ questioned the Director's credibility, finding that there were considerable gaps in the Director's statements. The Commission affirmed the AJ's findings on appeal, and noted that even if the Agency met its burden of providing a legitimate reason for Complainant's non-selection, the evidence supported a finding of pretext. Specifically, Complainant was considered the best candidate by his second-level supervisor, and the record showed that Complainant was better qualified than the selectee. The Agency was ordered, among other things, to place Complainant into the position or a similar position, with appropriate back pay and benefits, and pay him proven compensatory damages. Cleveland C. v. Dep't of Def., EEOC Appeal No. 0120172596 (Oct. 25, 2017) - Complainant filed a formal complaint alleging that the Agency discriminated against him when it suspended him for failure to follow written regulations, orders, rules, or procedures. The Agency dismissed the complaint on the grounds of mootness, noting that management issued a memorandum rescinding its decision to suspend Complainant. On appeal, the Commission found that while the Agency did rescind the suspension, the notice of rescission clearly stated that it still had the right to pursue disciplinary action for the same incident on or after the effective date of this memorandum. Accordingly, the Commission found that the Agency did not show that the matter was moot, because the alleged violation involving the same incident could recur. On September 26, 2018, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's Office of Federal Operations issued its decision in Cleveland C. et al. v. Dept. of Defense, EEOC Appeal Nos. 0120170405-0120170414. Shifting from prior precedent, the EEOC recognized reasonable accommodation protections for persons suffering from pseudofolliculitis barbae (PB). PB affects clean-shaven skin in some persons with curly hair, chiefly raising problems for some African-American men. The best treatment for PB sufferers concerning facial hair is keeping a short beard. PB sufferers often faced adverse actions due to workplace appearance policies or safety rules prohibiting facial hair. Before the 2008 ADA Amendments Act (ADAAA), PB suffers could not seek relief through reasonable accommodation requests for their disability; race discrimination claims had failed in court. Before Cleveland C., there had been no EEOC decisions concerning PB and disability discrimination under the ADAAA. Complainants worked for the Pentagon Force Protection Agency (PFPA). After years of allowing medical waivers to PFPA's no-facial hair policy, PFPA stopped granting waivers, claiming Complainants could not use respirators with a beard, no matter how short. However, Complainants had never needed to wear a respirator in an emergency, and had all passed standard respirator fit tests with short beards. PFPA ignored OSHA regulations requiring alternate respirators for PB sufferers. Complainants requested reasonable accommodation consistent with the OSHA regulations, but PFPA denied reasonable accommodation without individualized assessment. While OFO's Cleveland C. decision makes no final determination on the issue of unlawful denial of reasonable accommodation, it includes several important holdings: • PB is a disability under the ADAAA; • PFPA wrongly found Complainants were a direct threat to themselves or others, and incorrectly applied a blanket policy banning facial hair without individualized assessment; and • PFPA used the wrong analysis to find Complainants not "qualified" for their positions. OFO ordered PFPA to conduct a remand investigation on: • Whether PFPA's shaving policy is genuinely related to Complainants' ability to perform the essential functions of their positions, including how frequently Complainants were required to don a facemask, how often respirators failed to seal due to facial hair, and whether Complainants passed respirator fit tests with facial hair. • The feasibility of reasonably accommodating Complainants by creating an exception to PFPA policy to allow a small degree of facial hair if the respirators can still form an adequate seal; and • The feasibility of accommodating Complainants using alternative respirators. Key Takeaways: • Federal workers suffering from arguably less severe forms of disabling conditions may be protected from disability discrimination • Federal agencies cannot escape potential liability for disability discrimination by hiding behind facially neutral policies • Reasonable medical accommodation must be considered when a federal employee indicates that he or she cannot comply with a policy for medical reasons Jeannie McIver v. Jim Mattis, United States Department of Defense, U.S. District Court, District of Columbia 16-1448 (DLF) (July 24, 2018) - Jeannie McIver brings claims 1614 48 (DLF) against the U.S. Department of Defense under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Rehabilitation Act. In early 2014, McIver became a police officer recruit with the Pentagon Force Protection Agency. One of McIver’s supervisors, Erik McVicker, told her that she would need to attend a training program in July 2014. In June, however, McIver informed her superiors that she would be unable to attend the training because she needed to care for her disabled mother. She submitted a request for an alternative work schedule, but it was denied. The complaint states that McIver then “invoked her Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) rights” to seek another accommodation. When McVicker ordered McIver to attend the training program, McIver responded that she could not because she needed to care for her mother. McVicker then submitted McIver’s accommodation request and asked her to resign. McIver was subsequently placed on AWOL status and McVicker stated that he would remove her from federal service if she did not attend the training. McIver alleges that a white male who was hired as a police officer recruit with her did not have to attend the training. Around July 20, 2014, McIver underwent emergency surgery for a ruptured ulcer. She subsequently requested an accommodation for light-duty work, but on August 28, McVicker instead began to remove her as an officer recruit. McIver alleges that she was never accommodated and instead had to use excessive amounts of leave time from July 2014 to January 2015. On August 29, 2014, McIver filed an Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) complaint for race and s*x discrimination. In March 2015, one of McIver’s supervisors placed her on AWOL status on the grounds that she had used excessive medical leave and was negatively impacting employee morale. In April 2015, McIver sought accommodation for an “alternate course of action.” This was denied in May 2015. McIver filed another EEO charge against the Pentagon Force Protection Agency, this time for retaliation, on July 20, 2015. McIver sued the Secretary of Defense in July 2016. Appellant v. Dept. of Def., Pentagon Force Protection Agency MSPB (October 12, 2017) – The agency removed the appellant based on the charge of lack of candor. DC-0752-15-1102-I-1, Appeal File (AF1), Tab 8 at 4. The agency bears the burden of proving its charge by preponderant evidence. 5 U.S.C. § 7701(c)(1)(B).1 The agency must also establish the existence of a nexus between any sustained charge and the efficiency of the service. 5 U.S.C. § 7513(a). Finally, the agency must demonstrate the reasonableness of the penalty it has imposed. Douglas v. Veterans Administration, 5 M.S.P.R. 280, 307-08 (1981). The appellant alleges that his removal was motivated by discrimination based on national origin, and retaliation for testifying of otherwise lawfully assisting an individual in the exercise of an appeal right, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(9)(B). The appellant beard the burden of proving these affirmative defenses by preponderant evidence. 5 C.F.R. § 1201.56(b)(2)(C). Key takeaways: • The agency's charge of lack of candor was not sustained. • The appellant's claim of national origin discrimination was not sustained. • The Administrative Judge (AJ) cited that the agency failed to demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that it would have taken the removal action in the absence of the appellant's protected activity. Accordingly, the AJ concluded that the appellant established his claim of retaliation for testifying or otherwise lawfully assisting an individual in the exercise of an appeal right, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(9)(B). • The agency was ordered to cancel the removal and to retroactively restore the appellant effective August 30, 2015. Candi R. v. Department of Defense, EEOC Appeal No. 0120172238 (Feb. 28, 2019) Complainant alleged that the Agency discriminated against her based on a perceived disability when it placed her on light duty and deemed her not medically qualified for her Police Officer position. Complainant was initially diagnosed with asthma. After she had an allergic reaction, she was prescribed an EpiPen. An allergist-immunologist subsequently diagnosed her with exercise-induced anaphylaxis but determined that she was fit for duty as a Police Officer. After Complainant provided medical documentation of these conditions to the Agency, she was placed on light-duty status. An Agency physician examined Complainant and determined that she was not fit for duty because she had a "potentially life-threatening medical condition" that impacted her ability to engage in physical activity. On appeal, the Commission determined that the Agency regarded Complainant as substantially limited in the major life activity of working. The Agency concluded that Complainant's asthma prevented her from immediately performing aerobic or strenuous tasks, and, as such, she was not qualified as a Police Officer. The Commission noted that the criteria used by the Agency were not unique to Complainant's Police Officer job, and the Agency regarded Complainant as being significantly restricted from performing all jobs requiring aerobic or strenuous exercise. The Agency did not contest Complainant's ability to perform the duties of the Police Officer position but asserted that she was not qualified based upon the possibility of future injury to herself or others. The Commission found, however, that nothing in the record showed that Complainant's medical condition impaired her performance of essential tasks as a Police Officer. Additionally, the Agency did not individually assess Complainant and, instead, applied a blanket medical qualification standard without examining the specific application to Complainant when it disqualified her. Complainant had never experienced anaphylaxis while on duty or while performing a hazardous activity and would be able to self-administer an EpiPen if a reaction were to occur. The Commission held that the Agency did not sustain its burden to show that Complainant posed a significant risk of harm to herself or others and was fully qualified to perform Police Officer duties. The Commission concluded that while it was reasonable for the Agency to initially place Complainant in light duty status pending receipt of medical documentation, the Agency discriminated against Complainant when it failed to return her to her Police Officer position in a full duty status. The Agency was ordered, among other things, to offer Complainant reinstatement to the Police Officer position, with appropriate back pay and benefits. Candi R. v. James N. Mattis, Secretary, Department of Defense, EEOC Appeal No. 0120172238 (2019) PROMOTION ILLEGALLY DENIED DUE TO RISK OF FUTURE INJURY The law requires agencies denying promotions to meet a certain criteria, and the Pentagon Force Protection Agency (PFPA) ignored them, it resulted in an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) order that it rehire the complainant with eight years of retroactive pay. EEOC wrote, “Any qualification based on the risk of future injury must be examined with special care if the Rehabilitation Act is not to be circumvented easily. To exclude an individual based on possible future injury, the Agency must show more than that an individual with a disability stands some elevated risk of future injury; rather, it must show that there is ‘significant risk of substantial harm to the health or safety of the individual or others that cannot be eliminated or reduced by reasonable accommodation.’” 29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(r) The Commission went on to identify four factors it will look at to determine whether a job denial based on future risk is allowed. They are: • the duration of the risk, • the nature and severity of the potential harm, • the likelihood that the potential harm will occur, and • the imminence of the potential harm. Even more significantly, The Commission wrote, “A determination of significant risk cannot be based merely on an employer’s subjective evaluation, or, except in cases of a most apparent nature, merely on medical reports. Rather, the Agency must gather information and base its decision on substantial information regarding the individual’s work and medical history.” That is a very high bar to clear. In this case, the Agency did not make an individualized assessment of the alleged risk posed by Complainant and, instead, applied a blanket medical qualification standard without examining the specific application to Complainant when it found exercise/mold induced anaphylaxis disqualified her for the Police Officer position. The Complainant was awarded retroactive credit for annual and sick leave that would have been earned and the Agency was additionally ordered to pay extra compensation for the adverse tax consequences of receiving back pay as a lump sum. In closing, the agency has subjected and exposed its employees to a toxic, hostile, and repressive work environment, on a consistent basis, for years. African American police officers have long sought redress through the DoD Office of the Inspector General (OIG), the WHS Equal Employment Opportunity Programs (EEOP) Office, the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC), the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), Congressional petitions, and various federal courts complaining of the Pentagon Force Protection Agency's resistance to affirmative action, use of ethnic slurs or racial epithets, abuses of power, facially discriminatory policies that are disproportionate to people with disabilities and people of color, discriminatory promotional practices, botched internal affairs investigations, frivolous internal affairs charges, and other acts that have humiliated and embarrassed African Americans and held them back in their careers, or ruining their careers in its entirety. I firmly believe that the last Director left due to widespread corruption in the Agency in which he had direct involvement. The current Agency Director has been passed the torch in order to continue in the ongoing corruption. #pentagonpolice #pentagonforceprotectionagency #stopthecorruption #endabuseofauthority #protectwhistleblowers #stoppunishingwhistleblowers #stopworkplacebullying #endworkplaceviolence #stompoutracism #enddiscrimination #endretaliation #dontconfirmdanielwalshasagencydirector #therankandfiledeservesbetterleadership