Defense-minded lawmakers are growing concerned about leadership vacuums in the military following the resignation of Army Secretary Dan Driscoll.

“I’m tired of all the churn. I want to see some stability,” House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike D. Rogers, R-Ala., told reporters Tuesday.

Pressed on if he’s concerned about a leadership vacuum in the Army now, Rogers replied, “yes,” though he declined to elaborate on his concern.

Driscoll submitted his resignation to President Donald Trump on Monday, with several reports saying he detailed concerns to the president about Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth gutting the service’s upper ranks to undermine Driscoll’s Army modernization plans.

Driscoll’s resignation came after months of reported clashes with Hegseth. In addition to Hegseth’s purge of top Army officers, tensions reportedly arose over Driscoll’s close relationship with Vice President JD Vance.

Driscoll, an Army veteran and financier, went to Yale Law School with Vance, and the two have remained close friends.

Additionally, the White House tapped Driscoll to lead negotiations to end the war between Russia and Ukraine last November, further raising his profile within the administration.

Despite coming into the job with little experience leading a large organization, Driscoll won rare bipartisan plaudits for his efforts to transform Army structure and equipment for the 21st century.

“I thank Secretary Driscoll for his service to our nation, first in uniform as an Army officer and then as secretary of the Army,” Senate Armed Services Committee ranking member Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., said in a statement Monday. “He worked to transform the Army for the battlefield of the future, and he engaged with Congress candidly and consistently.”

Driscoll’s resignation leaves the military’s largest branch with neither a Senate-confirmed civilian leader nor a Senate-confirmed uniformed leader amid a protracted war with Iran and as the Pentagon works to convince Congress to approve a $1.5 trillion defense budget. Hegseth fired the Army’s chief of staff, Gen. Randy George, in April.

“I am alarmed that Secretary Driscoll’s leadership of the Army stands in stark contrast to Secretary Hegseth’s disastrous tenure atop the Defense Department,” Reed said in his statement, adding that he hoped Trump would recognize the harm Hegseth is inflicting on the department. “In the Army alone, he has fired and blocked the promotions of dozens of senior officers without explanation, including Army Chief of Staff General Randy George and half of all four-star generals.”

While Republicans did not directly criticize Hegseth, some expressed dismay that Driscoll’s departure leaves a leadership vacuum — notable in an era when the GOP typically avoids any public critique of the administration.

“We need to get a good replacement there as quickly as possible,” Rep. Ken Calvert, R-Calif., the chairman of the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, told reporters on Tuesday. 

Pressed on how Driscoll’s resignation reflects on Hegseth, Calvert did not directly answer but lamented “a number of disruptions in the department.”

“Hopefully, those are coming to an end. Especially now, with all this going on, we don’t need a lot of this diversion,” Calvert continued.

Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Va., the vice chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, similarly bemoaned the lack of Senate-confirmed leaders in the Army.

“You need a confirmed individual there in Army leadership positions, and right now you don’t have that,” he told reporters, urging the administration to nominate a candidate and the Senate to act quickly to fill at least one of the two positions. “It’s not good for us for a service branch to have no confirmed positions currently filled.”

The Navy is also without a Senate-confirmed civilian leader right now after the administration fired former Navy Secretary John Phelan in April.

Wittman, though, appeared less concerned about a Navy leadership vacuum, highlighting that the chief of naval operations, Adm. Daryl Caudle, is Senate-confirmed.

Other Republicans brushed off the Army leadership turmoil altogether.

“I think Secretary Driscoll did a great job, and I think we’ll get an adequate replacement,” Rep. Trent Kelly, R-Miss., a House Armed Services Committee member, told reporters. “If we have an Army that a leader can’t step up to the next level, we have a failed Army anyway. The Army is designed for leaders to replace leaders.”