During a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing last week, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) asked a Trump Department of Defense nominee about his holdings in a defense industry company.
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Mr. O'Keefe, I led the passage of a measure called the Xavier Sander Act, which is named in honor of a young sailor from Connecticut who took his own life while serving on the USS George Washington.
00:24His ship was in maintenance. He was enduring unacceptably poor living conditions while the ship was in for repair. Too many junior enlisted service members have been forced to live aboard vessels while they're under repair without air conditioning, without meals, without rest, effectively, and with limited access to amenities and mental health support.
00:53So the Navy now has expanded authorities to provide sailors with a basic allowance for housing as a result of this act.
01:03They can live in commercial housing. They have increased access to mental health support. No service member should suffer as Xavier did. I'm still in touch with his father and his family and other service members.
01:19I'd like your commitment that you will fully support implementation of the Xavier Sanders Act.
01:25Mr. Yes, Senator. Absolutely. And it was a privilege to work on that legislation with you. I do think it's a great case study. I know your office worked with the Navy in working with that, too. It's a great case study in where the Congress and the Department of Defense and the services, when working together on a problem, can really come up with some very effective solutions. So thank you for working on that.
01:44Thank you. And I'd like a commitment. If you're confirmed that you will send me a report on the usage of these authorities, say, by the end of the year. Absolutely. Yes, Senator. Thank you.
01:57Mr. Oberdal, I know you've served in the Army for 30 years and then left for the private sector.
02:08The company where you are now, Anderil Industries, is a major defense firm with millions of dollars of contracts with the DOD.
02:22Will you commit to sell the stock that you own in that company?
02:27Well, Senator, I appreciate the opportunity to address that. I believe in two things, I think, that I share with members of this committee, and that's transparency and very strong ethical guidelines.
02:38And as with every potential senior government official, I've gone through an exhaustive process with the Office of Government Ethics, and they have done a thorough review and presented me with the guidelines.
02:53I will abide by all of those guidelines. And as I always have, I will abide by the law.
02:59Is that a yes or a no?
03:02Well, Senator, my restrictions and my recusals are laid out in my agreement with the OGE.
03:11My understanding is that you're not selling the stock. Is that correct?
03:14So that is detailed in my agreement that I will retain that?
03:18If you're not selling the stock, doesn't that create an appearance of conflict of interest?
03:23of interest? Well, Senator, under section 1117 of the 22 NDAA, I am recused writ large from anything
03:33having to do personally and substantially with my former employer. Well, I'm not asking you whether
03:42you're recused. I'm asking you about the appearance of continuing owned stock in a company that has
03:48major contracts with the DOD, where you're in charge of essentially administering the
03:55Army, and the interests of that company could be affected. Whether or not you're recused from
04:02the specific approval of the contract, it still is an appearance of conflict of interest. I'm not
04:08going to debate with you, but, you know, in this administration, it may seem minor as a conflict
04:18of interest, given that the President of the United States is selling crypto and inviting
04:24people to the White House who buy his meme coin and making hundreds of millions of dollars
04:31from transactions in that coin. I think he has lowered the bar irretrievably, but it still
04:39is really regrettable. Let me go on to another topic. I understand that there may be a parade
04:45on June 14th to celebrate the President's birthday. Do you support that use of 30, 50, perhaps
04:5760 million dollars for a parade to celebrate the President's birthday?
05:01Well, Senator, I can only comment on what I've seen. I do not understand. I don't know the
05:06costs of a parade. What I do know is that the Army is celebrating its 250th birthday on June
05:1314th with a parade that will showcase soldiers and provide a level of access.
05:19What amount of expenditure would be appropriate, in your view?
05:22Well, Senator, I can't comment on that because I'm not in the department, and I can't make
05:28an assessment on the effects. Let me ask you hypothetically, wouldn't
05:32it be a better use of Army funds for training, for care of the troops, for housing, not to mention
05:43thousands of veterans who have been fired from the VA supposedly to save money? Wouldn't
05:49those be better uses of that money? Well, Senator, I'm not going to engage in the hypothetical.
05:53What I will say is that the military, the DOD writ large, does a number of things like this
05:59to increase awareness and to use as a recruiting and appreciation tool for the citizens of the
06:06United States. I'm not against celebrating the Army's birthday. What I would ask you to oppose
06:14is the use of anywhere from $40 to $50 million, as has been publicly reported. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
06:21Thank you, Senator.