Senate Republicans on Tuesday expressed skepticism about President Donald Trump’s decision to name Bill Pulte, a lawyer and Trump ally who has been working on housing policy issues and has no known intelligence or national security background, as acting director of national intelligence.

Pulte will take over the agency, which coordinates efforts across the intelligence community, after DNI Tulsi Gabbard resigns later this month. Trump had originally announced that Gabbard’s current chief deputy, Aaron Lukas, a career intelligence official, would be assuming the acting role, but pivoted without explanation.

It’s not clear yet whether Trump plans to nominate Pulte, who he said will simultaneously continue in his current roles as director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency and chairman of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as permanent DNI, but given initial reactions from critical Senate Republicans, he would likely struggle to be confirmed. The statute establishing the post also requires that the nominee be an individual with experience in national security.

Under federal law, Pulte could serve in the role in an acting capacity for up to 210 days, before requiring Senate confirmation.

Leading Senate Republicans said they did not think Pulte was qualified for the role.

“I don’t see any evidence of qualifications for that job, but as you know the Senate doesn’t have a role to play in acting [appointments],” Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) said. Cornyn would be a crucial swing vote on the Senate Intelligence Committee if Pulte is nominated for the permanent role, and was recently defeated in his primary by a Trump-backed challenger.

“He doesn’t seem very qualified,” Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA), also recently defeated by a Trump-backed primary challenger, agreed.

Sen. Ted Budd (R-NC), who also sits on the Intelligence Committee, offered a terse response. “Certainly an interesting choice. There’s a lot of talented people that I probably would have considered. Congrats on his nom[ination],” Budd said.

Other Senate Republicans couched their comments, emphasizing their lack of familiarity with Pulte and his record, and saying they were not aware of whether he had any national security experience (per his public record, Pulte does not).

Sen. James Lankford (R-OK), a member of the Intelligence Committee, said that he did not know what experience Pulte has in intelligence, or whether he would be nominated for the role in the long-term. But he emphasized that intelligence experience is critical for the job.

“That role’s pretty important in coordinating people from a lot of different agencies, you’ve got to have some level of trust in the different agencies to be able to help move,” Lankford said. “The ODNI’s role is to be able to see where are the siloes and to be able to help tear those down to make sure we keep our nation secure. If you don’t know those different roles — it’s not a matter of knowing intelligence products, it’s knowing how each agency actually works. That’s the bigger challenge. If you don’t have any familiarity with that, that does make that job tougher.”

He said separately that it’s critical for the job to remain “nonpartisan.”

“I had no idea he had national security experience. I’m going to have to look into his resume,” said Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC), who is retiring and has broken on numerous occasions with the administration.

Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) said that she doesn’t know anything about Pulte, including whether he had any intelligence or military background or even a security clearance.

She said she’s not concerned about her lack of familiarity with Pulte “yet, because maybe there’s a lot in his background that is relevant to this important position. As one of the authors of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, which created the position of DNI, I obviously care a great deal about having a qualified individual in that position.”

Other top Senate Republicans were also hardly enthusiastic about Trump’s pick.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) said, when asked if he was worried about Pulte weaponizing the role, “we don’t need a weaponized DNI, we need professionals there,” but said he had “just heard about it.”

“If he’s somebody they want in that position permanently, he’s got, as you all know, a lengthy road ahead of him,” Thune continued.

Asked at a press conference later in the day about the choice, Thune deferred to Intelligence Committee Chairman Tom Cotton (R-AR), who said he has “no observations” on the choice of Pulte.

Trump’s choice of Pulte for the role is likely to fuel greater concerns that he aims to politicize and weaponize the role for his own ends. Pulte, in his current role, became perhaps best-known for pursuing investigations against and making allegations that various political adversaries of Trump were engaged in mortgage fraud.

Gabbard faced backlash for her alleged involvement in manipulating intelligence information to fit the administration’s preferred narrative, and for her involvement in an FBI raid on an elections office in Georgia, linked to Trump’s claims that the 2020 presidential election was fraudulent.

In a scathing statement, Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), the ranking member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said that Trump’s appointment of Pulte “makes clear that this president is not looking for an intelligence leader who will follow the facts or speak truth to power, but rather someone who will be willing to shape intelligence around the president’s wishes, regardless of the cost to the American people.”

He said that Pulte is not only unqualified for the job, but “appears to have been selected precisely because the White House believes he will provide the narrative it wants, not the intelligence we need,” ultimately raising the risk of a terrorist attack.

Pulte’s appointment could make the passage of critical legislation renewing federal foreign surveillance authorities more difficult. The legislation was already plagued by opposition on both sides.