HUNTSVILLE, Ala. — Acting Army Secretary Patrick Murphy unexpectedly took over the highest civilian position in the Army in January as the confirmation of President Barack Obama's nominee, Eric Fanning, hit a snag in Congress.
An Iraq War veteran himself, Murphy has been a champion for soldiers from several vantage points over the years. He was a US congressman from 2007 to 2011, co-authoring legislation like the 21st Century GI Bill, the repeal of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy and Hire Heroes.
Murphy has also worked in television as an anchor for MSNBC's "Taking the Hill" where he addressed military and veterans' issues. He's also a lawyer, having served in the Army JAG Corps and as a litigator in private practice.
In Huntsville
,
earlier this month, Murphy — a CrossFit fan — woke up before sunrise to work out with Alabama A&M University ROTC cadets.
The secretary also toured Anniston Army Depot where he gave out coins to young engineers just getting their start and questioned whether he could do a pullup off the back of a Stryker on the production line.
Murphy fires a Javelin missile in a test at Redstone Arsenal, Ala., on March 18.
Photo Credit: US Army
Murphy climbed into the front seat of an AH-64E Apache attack helicopter for a flight around Redstone Arsenal and on the same day fired a man-portable, fire-and-forget, antitank Javelin missile.
And he captured most of it using social media tools not many in the military even know exist. Murphy streamed a live video feed of his Apache flight and Javelin shot, and he posts regularly to Twitter and Facebook.
The secretary also keeps soldiers and civilian employees engaged in what he’s doing by sending out frequent emails to the entire Army, a level of outreach that is seen as unique. When he’s entering or leaving a room, no hand is left hanging, he goes out of his way to shake them all.
Murphy repeatedly stressed throughout his trip to Alabama that the Army makes soldiers better and that veterans should be seen as "civic assets."
The secretary invited Defense News along on his two-day visit and sat down for an interview on his flight back to Washington, D.C. Here are some edited excerpts:
You were asked very suddenly to pick up the torch in January, so what has been your biggest challenge in having to do that and also what have you enjoyed most in the job?
What I have enjoyed the most is being back with my fellow soldiers. It is hard not to be inspired when you are doing PT with them. Getting out at Alabama A&M in the morning or seeing how excited they are to tell you what they are doing out there to keep our soldiers safe.
I left Congress five years ago as an appropriator and we funded the Army at $243 billion and now we are asking for a base of $148 billion. So that cut has been pretty drastic, but it is not as bad as sequestration with the [Bipartisan Budget Act], but it is the minimally acceptable level.
You had the benefit of starting your job around the same time the National Commission on the Future of the Army came out with its report with 63 recommendations. The Army Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Milley has said there are a few nonstarters like cutting an entire infantry brigade combat team. What else is a nonstarter?
I am an optimist by nature but there are 40 recommendations that we are already implementing and that we are going through recommendation by recommendation, in a very rigorous manner with the National Guard, Reserve and active-duty representatives in a room. It gave suggestions but it didn’t come with a funding resource. So balancing that is going to be tough at times.
What recommendations that come with an unfunded bill do you think may be important enough to fight for?
The most important takeaway was the total Army focus, that we are one team of active-duty, National Guard and Reserves. For FY-18 we are planning on doubling the combat training center rotations for our National Guard units, which comes at a cost but needs to happen.
Obviously the commission seems to make recommendations that might heal whatever this rift is between the National Guard and the active force. Having been around government and the Army, do you feel that same rift? Was it more among leadership or did it trickle down?
I do think there was a rift and I don’t blame it on any one leadership team or specific leaders. I think it wanes and flows during times but I think it is flowing back in the right direction.
I think the Milley-Murphy team has been very clear since day one that it is unacceptable to have divisions within our Army.
House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, has said that he plans to take the unfunded requirement lists from the services seriously and put some real money behind it. But you have served in Congress, what do you believe is truly feasible given the climate and also the state in Congress itself?
I am actually very confident that Chairman Thornberry, Chairman [Sen. John] McCain, Sen. [Harry] Reid and c
C
ongressman [Adam] Smith can muster the political will to meet not just our underlying budget but to fund potentially our $7.5 billion UFR request.
Murphy visits the showroom floor at the Association of the US Army's Global Force Symposium in Huntsville, Ala., on March 17.
Photo Credit: US Army
Do you think there is a possibility you can see everything funded?
We have had both public and classified conversations with the Senate and [the House] and they are all struck at the operational tempo, the threat level and the readiness concerns that we have.
Given some of our more recent issues with Russia, do you think we need to prioritize armor capability?
Yes. I think what you are seeing, what we are doing with [Army Pre-positioned Stock] and other movements in Europe to deter Russia and assure our allies is profound … without losing focus of our rebalance in Asia.
I think we need to muster the political will of our allies to meet their commitments in defense spending and to focus our efforts to root out the evil of the Islamic State group.
The Islamic State, or ISIS, threat is a whole other can of worms. Unlike Russia, it's an enemy that thrives on fighting using unpredictability and no template. How should the Army build capability against such a threat?
I think our fight against al-Qaida, the last 15 years have shown, that we could take the fight to them and be agile and innovative. We have to use those same principles in [counterterrorism] against ISIS. And I think with our refocus and our more aggressive posture the last several months has shown some short-term successes and gives us a foundation for long-term gains. I think those of us who were serving, like I was on 9/11, understand that the major lesson learned was not to allow a safe harbor happen.
When you walk away from this job, and you don't know when that will be, what do you hope is not going to be unfinished business?
That we have made extreme gains in taking the fight to ISIS, that we have deterred Russia and reassured our allies, that strategically we have continued to rebalance in Asia and most importantly that our soldiers are more better off through initiatives like the Soldier for Life transition program and maintaining an all-volunteer force.
You send out these weekly emails to everyone in the Army, which has really stood out, what made you think to do that?
I joined the Army 23 years ago. The first thing they tell you to do is to have the confidence to stand in front of a formation and let them know what your vision is as a leader. I can’t go around to 1.4 million folks in the Army team, both soldiers and civilians, but what I can do is communicate to them to let them know what my priorities are and how grateful I am for their incredible service.
What did you learn from this trip specifically?
Seventy percent of our electronics are obsolete prior to new system fielding, and how we are utilizing analytics, that we are now three to five years ahead of where we were before and that is due to our utilization of analytic tools. I have been very clear with senior leaders that we need to be proactive and not reactive and I think that shows that we are making important improvements.
You are a lawyer, what are your thoughts about the rise in the frequency of protests when contracts are awarded? Lockheed Martin recently even filed a lawsuit in the Court of Federal Claims over the JLTV decision. Most of these are unsuccessful protests, but slow acquisition. Do you have any ideas how to solve this problem?
I have a lot of ideas to make our acquisition process faster, more efficient, more, I would say, business friendly, but also more innovative and accountable to the American taxpayer. The fact that there are 200 protests a year is an indictment on the process and oftentimes is an abuse by industry.
Any parting comments before we land?
I hope that folks who read this piece, I hope soldiers, civilians and professionals that read this piece appreciate that this is a defining moment in our country’s history, that for the last 15 years our country has turned to the Army time and time again to help during regional floods, natural disasters and international crises and we are proud that when governors and the president of the United States dial 911, that it is the U
.
S
.
Army that answers the call.
That is why we serve, that is why we sign up.
Email: jjudson@defensenews.comTwitter:
Jen Judson is an award-winning journalist covering land warfare for Defense News. She has also worked for Politico and Inside Defense. She holds a Master of Science degree in journalism from Boston University and a Bachelor of Arts degree from Kenyon College.
