UPDATE: Millard's nomination passed the Senate Commerce Committee on Thursday afternoon on a party-line vote, with 15 Republicans voting for his promotion and 13 Democrats voting against it. The nomination now moves to the U.S. Senate for a full vote.
A promotion to captain for Coast Guard Lt. Cdr. Jesse Millard remains on the table and will be in the U.S. Senate's hands.
A past whistleblower complaint and an inspector general’s report caused Democratic lawmakers to revisit the nomination in the days preceding a final vote on Thursday afternoon. The Republican majority on the Senate Commerce Committee vaulted Millard, with 15 Republicans voting "yes" and 13 Democrats voting "no," according to audio recordings and transcripts provided to Military.com.
Military.com previously learned that a letter from a whistleblower, former Coast Guard Commander Dr. Kimberly McLear, was written March 2, 2026, and addressed to all members of the Senate Commerce Committee through an online whistleblower portal prior to a markup session. Millard was first nominated for promotion to captain in November 2023, but had that nomination pulled on March 7, 2024.
McLear denounced Millard’s nomination and strongly discouraged his being promoted, citing a previous independent investigation by the Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General (DHS OIG) finding that Millard engaged in whistleblower retaliation against his subordinate (McLear), amid other accusations including violating the Military Whistleblower Protection Act.
In that March 2 correspondence to the committee, McLear painted a bleak picture of government mistrust, saying that a promotion for Millard would “perpetuate a pattern of institutional failure that Congress has already rightfully and strongly condemned.”
“I was a high-performing, permanent professor at the Coast Guard Academy with the ability to serve my country in uniform for up to 30 years, but my career was cut short by 10 years because of the abuse I endured and the debilitating PTSD that has followed ever since,” McLear wrote. The report in question never once mentions PTSD.
“His career advanced with fanfare, like many others the Coast Guard never held accountable. The Coast Guard has never formally apologized to me, nor have they ever held a single person who harmed me and was found guilty by the OIG and Congress, accountable,” she added.
The March 12 Vote, Senators' Remarks
The 15-13 vote that propelled Millard to the next phase of his nomination process, and in front of the entire U.S. Senate, was followed by remarks made by both Democrats and Republicans on the Senate Commerce Committee led by Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX) and ranking member Maria Cantwell (D-WA).
Cantwell, who during a March 4 markup brought up her concerns regarding Millard and a 2018 Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General (DHS OIG) report, reiterated prior to the vote that Millard's past should disqualify him from this promotion.
According to audio recordings, Cantwell thanked McLear for her courage and mentioned the OIG report, in addition to "cultural failings" in the aftermath of Operation Fouled Anchor, which involved the Coast Guard Investigative Service looking into more than 100 separate allegations of sexual assault that occurred between 1990 and 2006 at the Coast Guard Academy.
The ranking member's concerns were echoed by Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), who expressed "deep concern" over Millard's promotion and the Coast Guard's past record related to investigations.
"Operation Fouled Anchor revealed a Coast Guard culture that tolerated and protected abuse for years," Baldwin said. "Since then, this committee including the Coast Guard subcommittee when I was chair, has passed critical legislation to promote transparency, accountability and respect throughout the Coast Guard."
While work has been ongoing in ensuring that harassment and assaults are "never swept under the rug again," Baldwin said that supporting Millard's promotion "would be a step in the wrong direction" notably after Operation Fouled Anchor.
"If we intend to ensure there is accountability, then this committee cannot allow the promotion of officers into the Coast Guard's senior ranks who have substantiated claims of retaliation in their records," she added.
Cruz, following the successful vote in Millard's favor, offered his thoughts on Millard's nomination.
He called Millard a career service member undertaking "a modest promotion to captain," saying Democrats "would have effectively killed this man's career and tarnished his reputation" if they succeeded in voting down the promotion.
"Capt. Millard has done nothing wrong other than obey orders and display honesty and integrity," Cruz said. "This case stems from the accusations against Mr. Millard's superior by a serial complainant. The complainant in question filed repeated unsubstantiated accusations of discrimination and other charges against multiple senior officers.
"At some point, when the complaints are against everyone, the problem isn't the coworkers or the managers."
Cruz also accused McLear of "working with House Democrats to level political charges against the Coast Guard," adding that she was "sought to pull strings with impeached DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, who was her boss early in her career."
"The real victim here, unfortunately, is Cdr. Millard," Cruz added. "His reputation is being unfairly tarnished. He performed his duties with honor and integrity, and he deserves to continue in service to his fellow countrymen."
Concerns Leveled Against Millard Before Vote
The nomination previously drew conflicting reactions.
“The Committee has a long bipartisan record of fighting for transparency and accountability at the Coast Guard, including most recently calling for an independent Department of Homeland Security Office of the Inspector General investigation into the Coast Guard’s handling of the Operation Fouled Anchor scandal,” a Democratic committee aide told Military.com on Wednesday.
“Promoting an individual found to have violated the Military Whistleblower Protection Act is inconsistent with efforts to improve the culture of the Coast Guard.”
Republicans view Millard’s track record and the DHS OIG findings in a different light.
“The committee reviewed hundreds of documents, interviewed multiple officers and officials, and reached the same conclusion that three separate Coast Guard review panels found: the allegations are without merit,” a committee aide told Military.com. “The real victim here is Cdr. Millard, whose reputation is being unfairly tarnished. He performed his duties with honor and integrity and deserves to continue in service to his fellow countrymen.”
Cruz pulled Millard’s promotion from an originally scheduled March 4 markup and rescheduled it to Thursday, March 12.
Whistleblower: Promotion Would Be 'Egregious'
In additional correspondence provided to the committee on March 3, ahead of the original March 4 markup date, McLear reiterated her concerns by alleging that Millard was found guilty of creating a harassing and hostile work environment, including retaliation by the Coast Guard.
She stated how Millard was found guilty of violating the Military Whistleblower Protection Act—which, enshrined by law, prohibits reprisal against Coast Guard personnel or other service personnel who report violations of law, gross mismanagement, abuse of authority, or dangers to public safety.
“Not confirming Jesse Millard’s promotion to a coveted rank is the right thing to do and would send a message to victims of abuse in the Coast Guard that whistleblowers are actually protected instead of punished,” McLear wrote. “Given the Coast Guard never held him responsible, he never faced disciplinary action and therefore his officer record never reflected his true and unlawful misconduct.
While adding that Millard has “already slipped through the cracks” by virtue of being promoted to commander, McLear said it has happened “yet again” and “is direct evidence of institutional failure and continued harm against whistleblowers.”
I hope your committee can right this egregious wrong. As it took a lot of strength to testify of my experiences on Capitol Hill in 2019, writing this letter took an immense amount of strength for me.
“I struggle with PTSD and previously suffered form suicide ideation from the toll of the abuse of Jesse Millard and the Coast Guard top brass who have protected him and rewarded him all these years as my career was cut short 10 years," McLear added.
McLear said the situation is reminiscent of “the deeply disturbing institutional behavior later exposed by Operation Fouled Anchor in 2023,” which involved the Coast Guard Investigative Service looking into more than 100 separate allegations of sexual assault that occurred between 1990 and 2006 at the Coast Guard Academy.
“Different victims, same flag officer leadership, same methods: concealment of the misconduct, protection of perpetrators, punish the truthtellers. This is culture,” McLear said.
Inspector General Findings, 'Angry' Commander
The DHS OIG investigation took place from July 2015 to April 2018, involving reviewed evidence provided by McLear in addition to multiple witnesses. The investigation centered on whether Millard retaliated against McLear in response to her complaints of him giving her low marks on her 2016 Officer Evaluation Report (OER) after she filed harassment and EO complaints against Millard and other Coast Guard officials.
McLear filed numerous Equal Opportunity (EO) and other complaints against Coast Guard leaders at the Academy, including Millard, between July 2015 and January 2017. She had alleged discriminatory treatment based on race, gender, and a hostile work environment.
In its 44-page report finalized in 2018, the DHS OIG found that McLear “was retaliated against on the basis of her complaints, in violation of the Military Whistleblower Protection Act.”
“Specifically, a preponderance of the evidence established that her complaints were a contributing factor in the numerical marks in her OER for the period ending May 31, 2016,” reads the report. “The totality of the evidence demonstrated that Complainant would have received higher marks absent her complaints. DHS OIG thus recommends that the Secretary order corrective action with regard to Complainant’s OER.”
The DHS OIG report states that Millard “was so angry that on the same day as learning of the complaint, he drafted an email to himself demanding that Complainant apologize, then resign, for having made the complaint.”
How Marks Work
The Coast Guard uses a numerical ranking system for OERs where officers are graded by a supervisor on a 1-through-7 scale in the following categories: performance of duties, leadership, and personal qualities.
A mark of less than “6” is considered unusually low, according to the U.S. Naval Institute.
After learning of the subordinate’s complaints, Millard gave her two marks of “5” on her May 2016 OER whereas no other similarly situated officer received a “5” mark in any category over a three-year period (2015-2017). He also revised McLear’s 2016 OER three times.
When assessing McLear’s complaint, the DHS OIG report states that her accomplishments during the 2015-2016 OER period “lends itself to the conclusion that the marks were lowered based on outside influences, versus unbiased opinion and identifiable behaviors.”
Also, DHS OIG found that no other officer had received a single mark of “5” in any category among the totality of Department O-3 and O-4 officers for the periods ending in 2015, 2016 and 2017.
Millard did not receive any negative Coast Guard documentation pertaining to the ROI until March 12, 2024, when he was issued a negative CG-3307 ( referred to as a “Page 7”). He had been previously promoted in September 2019 without any lawmakers’ apparent awareness of the DHS OIG report and its findings.
In December 2024, Millard filed a request to remove Page 7 from his record. On April 2, 2025, the Coast Guard convened a Personnel Records Review Board (PRRB) to consider Millard’s request.
The PRRB through its review found that marks of “5” in McLear’s May 2016 OER “were not low, do not constitute an adverse personnel action, nor do they reflect any unfair bias against [subordinate].” The OER marks “did not reflect discriminatory intent or motive to retaliate by [Millard],” the PRRB added, antithetical to the DHS OIG findings.
It was recommended to remove Page 7 from Millard’s record while positively endorsing his nomination for captain.
Senators On Opposite Sides
Cantwell has expressed vehement concern for Millard’s promotion, as part of a committee that notoriously has been bipartisan and where members have voted almost always in lockstep for new Coast Guard promotions.
A transcript of the March 4 markup shared with Military.com shows Cantwell entering McLear’s letter into the record, mentioning how Millard “retaliated against this individual.” Cruz obliged without objection.
“I will note on the Coast Guard nomination that the facts concerning Jesse Millard are highly contested, and I believe our Democrat colleagues are being very unfair and maligning an honorable Coast Guard, Guardsmen,” Cruz said in response. “We will be taking up his promotion and in a subsequent markup, and we can discuss the merits of it then, but I will say, I think the facts are markedly different from what was just suggested.”
Cantwell responded by mentioning the DHS OIG’s independent investigation and findings, hoping for “a larger debate somewhere.”
