Our power as citizens in a representative republic depends entirely on our willingness to raise our voices. We elect people who we hope will be honest and wise and who will represent our interests, but they can’t do this if they don’t hear from us. Our elected representatives will ultimately cast the votes, but we have a responsibility to weigh in, particularly when our own experiences or insights would increase understanding.

Such is the case with our newly elected senator, Sen. John Curtis.

Referring to the confirmation hearings during a Politico Playbook live event on Tuesday, newly sworn in Sen. Curtis said: “I take very seriously the role that the Senate has in the Constitution for advice and consent.”

We should all feel grateful to hear this. With regard to President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for Secretary of Defense, Sen. Curtis has said that he met with Pete Hegseth and his wife, called the colleagues whose names Hegseth gave him and read his book.

While I appreciate these efforts, I must point out that these are hardly unbiased or impartial sources.

On Wednesday evening, Sen. Curtis made this statement: “After careful consideration, I have decided to vote in favor of Pete Hegseth’s nomination to be Secretary of Defense.”

Related
Sen. John Curtis says he’s made a decision on Pete Hegseth

If this is the conclusion he reached, I respectfully assert that Sen. Curtis’ consideration was not careful enough, and I urge him to reconsider his decision. Even the most cursory research would have revealed the numerous credible allegations against Mr. Hegseth of sexual misconduct, excessive drinking on the job and problematic statements about women in the military. Mr. Hegseth’s own mother sent him an email in 2018 wherein she wrote:

“Son, I have tried to keep quiet about your character and behavior, but ... I cannot stay silent. And as a woman and your mother I feel I must speak out. You are an abuser of women ... I have no respect for any man that belittles, lies, cheats, sleeps around and uses women for his own power and ego. You are that man.”

Sen. Curtis has said that character matters to him — that it’s “a big deal.” If this is true (and I believe him), then apparently his research did not uncover these deeply troubling details. Either that, or he somehow managed to minimize them. In his statement, Sen. Curtis said: “While there are actions from his past that give me pause, I carefully weighed these concerns against his qualifications, leadership style and commitment to bolstering the world’s most respected military.”

Wait. He weighed these concerns — concerns about the egregious mistreatment of women among other things — and they carried less import than wanting to bolster the military? As I’ve said elsewhere, if we minimize the mistreatment of women, we minimize the worth of women. Period.

Sen. Curtis also mentions Mr. Hegseth’s qualifications and leadership style, so let’s go there.

The truth is that nothing in Mr. Hegseth’s past has qualified him to oversee nearly 3.4 million military and civilian personnel and an estimated $850 billion budget, and much, in fact, actively disqualifies him.

In addition to his time in the National Guard, Mr. Hegseth’s career experience consists of running two small nonprofits (nearly into the ground) and being a Fox News talk show host.

He has a proven track record of financial mismanagement. Tax filings show that both of the nonprofits that Mr. Hegseth led (Vets for Freedom and Concerned Vets for America) had higher expenditures than revenue. And a whistleblower report alleged that drinking, sexual impropriety and financial mismanagement led to his departure from both organizations.

Related
Pete Hegseth faces scrutiny during Senate confirmation hearing. Here’s what happened

The Secretary of Defense is second-in-command to the commander in chief. During the confirmation hearing, Mr. Hegseth exhibited a shocking lack of understanding and knowledge of our military alliances and basic foreign affairs. He has criticized NATO, suggested that U.S. troops should not be bound by Geneva conventions and supported illegal torture techniques. In his 2024 book, “The War on Warriors,” he writes:

“What do you do if your enemy does not honor the Geneva conventions?” His answer is that the conventions should be ignored. “Hey, Al Qaeda: if you surrender, we might spare your life. If you do not, we will rip your arms off and feed them to hogs.” He then writes: “If our warriors are forced to follow rules arbitrarily ... so that international tribunals feel better about themselves, aren’t we just better off winning our wars according to our own rules!?”

87
Comments

This kind of chilling, anti-Christian, anti-American rhetoric should rattle us all to the core. A respect for the principles of just war theory and absolute adherence to the Geneva Conventions are essential to our survival as a humane and civilized society and must be honored by anyone holding the office of Secretary of Defense.

Of the dozens of individuals in the United States who would be eminently qualified to be Secretary of Defense, why did Trump select Hegseth? The answer seems clear. Loyalty trumps virtually everything else for, well, Trump. Our senators, though — including Sen. Curtis — must demand more.

And as his constituents, we must demand that he demand more. It’s possible that Sen. Curtis simply does not fully grasp why Hegseth’s treatment of women or views on the Geneva conventions are so disqualifying. We can’t fault him for that unless we do our part and speak up — or unless he refuses to hear us.

I, therefore, urge all of us — women and those with military backgrounds in particular — to contact Sen. Curtis immediately and share our thoughts about Mr. Hegseth so that he will have the requisite information to fulfill his duty to advise the incoming president to select a person with the necessary character, temperament and qualifications for this critical position. It’s not too late for Sen. Curtis to do the right thing.

Join the Conversation
Looking for comments?
Find comments in their new home! Click the buttons at the top or within the article to view them — or use the button below for quick access.