Pulte Appointment Accelerates Congressional Push to Eliminate ODNI

President Donald Trump's selection of Bill Pulte as acting Director of National Intelligence has sharpened a long-running debate on Capitol Hill over whether the Office of the Director of National Intelligence should continue to exist, elevating abolition from a fringe position to a topic of active discussion among senior members of both chambers.

Trump announced Pulte's appointment to the acting role to replace Tulsi Gabbard, who is stepping aside at the end of June. Pulte will retain his current position as director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency and chairman of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The president has said Pulte will not be nominated for the permanent post, which would require Senate confirmation. Before being named to the role, Pulte did not hold a security clearance granting him access to highly classified information, according to three sources familiar with the matter. Former Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell noted that "very few Senate-confirmable positions come with statutory eligibility requirements" and that the DNI is one of them, warning that any nominee who falls short of the experience requirement will not earn his vote.

The statutory framework at stake is the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-458), which was the most significant legislation affecting the U.S. intelligence community since the National Security Act of 1947, enacted in the wake of the 9/11 Commission's final report to ensure closer coordination among intelligence agencies. The act established the position of Director of National Intelligence, the National Counterterrorism Center, and the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board. The DNI is appointed by the president with the advice and consent of the Senate. Eliminating ODNI would require Congress to repeal or substantially amend the 2004 statute. The acting designation sidesteps that threshold, but any permanent structural changes to the office would require legislation.

Trump has signaled that Pulte's temporary status is an operational advantage rather than a constraint. In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, Trump confirmed he has told Pulte that ODNI is "unnecessary and/or too big" and instructed him to begin firing employees. The president also said ODNI "should maybe even be terminated." When asked whether he wants Pulte to fire employees, Trump said he wants the acting intelligence chief to "start the process," adding that his eventual permanent nominee should continue that work. Trump told the Journal that as an acting official Pulte is "less shackled," and said, "it sort of gives you more power, you know, for a somewhat limited period of time." ^[3][9] ODNI had roughly 1,800 employees at the start of the second Trump administration, though Gabbard reported reducing the workforce by about 25 percent. Sen. Tom Cotton, who chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee, has long argued the agency grew beyond its original mission and earlier in 2026 introduced legislation that would cap ODNI at 650 employees.

Republican reaction in the Senate has ranged from open to elimination to cautious. Senate Majority Leader John Thune told reporters there is "clearly an interest in downsizing and reevaluating the value that ODNI brings" [POLITICO]. Cotton endorsed the president's framing directly, writing on X that he has "long advocated for downsizing, if not outright eliminating, this bureaucracy" and stating that "the ODNI has grown far beyond its original mandate." Sen. John Kennedy, questioned by POLITICO, said "a lot of people whose judgment I respect tell me that it's unnecessary" and did not rule out supporting elimination [POLITICO]. A spokesperson for House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rick Crawford defended ODNI as "the only IC entity rooting out weaponization, holding wrongdoers accountable, and increasing transparency for the American people," while also calling the office "bloated" [POLITICO].

Democrats broadly opposed elimination but acknowledged the agency's size as a legitimate question. Sen. Mark Warner, the Intelligence Committee's vice chairman, said questions about whether ODNI had "grown too large" were legitimate but called for "a serious, fact-based discussion about what problem we're trying to solve" before Congress dismantles structures created after 9/11 [POLITICO]. Warner also argued that Pulte lacks the qualifications envisioned for the position. House Intelligence Committee Ranking Member Jim Himes called the agency "probably overly large" but said that concern should not drive a reflexive shutdown, pointing to the National Counterterrorism Center, which is housed within ODNI, as a counterterrorism asset that must be preserved [POLITICO]. With the elimination of several Mission Centers already underway, two ODNI Mission Centers remain: the National Counterterrorism Center and the National Counterintelligence and Security Center.

Pulte's appointment has generated a separate, immediate procedural consequence on Capitol Hill. The Senate failed to pass a reauthorization of a key surveillance program under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and some lawmakers have said they will not support the extension with Pulte overseeing the country's intelligence agencies. Senate Democrats moved to block consideration of the bill to reauthorize Section 702 of FISA, and seven Senate Republicans voted with the Democrats. That procedural standoff adds a concrete legislative cost to the appointment and creates leverage for members seeking to extract concessions on ODNI's structure or leadership. The president told reporters on Air Force One that he is interviewing five candidates for the permanent post at ODNI. Until a Senate-confirmed successor is in place, Pulte retains the operational authorities of the DNI, including oversight of all 18 agencies in the intelligence community, without having undergone the confirmation process the 2004 statute was designed to require.