WATCH: Debating GOP, Sherrill Sets the Record Straight on Women in Combat

Sherrill: “It’s dressed up as protecting women [...] But make no mistake: It’s about a deeply held belief that women shouldn’t fight.”

Ranking Member Smith: It is perfectly appropriate to have a helicopter pilot talk about what it’s like to serve in a combat role.”

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Representative Mikie Sherrill (NJ-11), former Navy helicopter pilot and member of the House Armed Services Committee, set the record straight debating a GOP amendment that would roll back progress for women serving in military combat roles. 

Watch Sherrill’s speech here. Her remarks as delivered are below: 

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise today in strong opposition to this amendment. 

It is just the latest in a long series of attempts by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to drum women out of combat roles in which they’re currently serving. 

It’s dressed up as protecting women as a step aimed at preserving military readiness. 

But, make no mistake, it’s about a deeply held belief that women shouldn’t fight. 

When I served in the Navy, I was a part of the first class of women eligible for most combat roles and I know firsthand what women bring to the table in combat roles. 

This fight is to ensure that women serve in combat roles. It’s the one that I’ve already fought and has impacted my entire career in the Navy. 

It has also impacted the careers of our first female Commanding Officer of an aircraft carrier, our first woman Chief of Naval Operations, our first female Superintendent of the Naval Academy 

And make no mistake, I had to pass numerous physical tests during my time in the Navy. 

Some such as the physical readiness tests were simply basic measures of fitness based on my age and gender. Some – such as the helicopter dunker, the platform dive, and SERE P.O.W. training school – were gender and age neutral and based on ability I needed to have to serve in a certain role, namely a helicopter pilot who flew over water, often at night.

And the military determined this, not Congress. Congress should not be telling the military what standards they should be implementing for physical fitness standards. 

The services have long had the ability to make these decisions based on their expert knowledge on what is actually needed for service members. 

Congress should not intervene especially when it could lead to the prevention of qualified women in combat roles and especially not as a cheap political ploy to score points in a culture war. 

By all means we don’t need to take my word for it, let’s see what the Army has to say. It’s redundant. Per Secretary Wormuth, the Army already has sex neutral fitness standards that apply to every single combat arms military occupational specialty. 

It’s duplicative. Per Secretary Wormuth, the Army is already pursuing increased standards to close combat force [Military Occupational Specialties] to comply with last year’s bill and it’s counterproductive under this amendment the Army would lack empirically defensible data to set the standards. 

Instead, per Secretary Wormuth, the Army would be forced to rely on this amendment’s conclusion that sex neutral minimum standards are scientifically justifiable without the science. 

Mr. Speaker, once again, this body is considering amendments that serve one goal: cheap shots at women as part of a MAGA culture war. 

Our military readiness is an incredibly important thing that should be treated with careful deliberation. 

It should not be subject to the whims of a single member of this House, who has willfully disregarded the input of experts of the Army and of the House Armed Services Committee which rejected this very amendment. 

So I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment as well. And I yield back the balance of my time. 

###