The Senate on Wednesday voted to pass the $895 billion Defense authorization bill, despite a provision on transgender care that turned off some Democrats, moving it along to President Biden’s desk to be signed into law.
Senators voted 85 to 14 in favor of passing the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), well more than the 60 needed in the 100-member upper chamber. The bill advanced even with the insertion of a controversial measure that would ban some gender-affirming care for transgender children of service members.
“Today, for the 64th consecutive year, the Senate passes a bipartisan National Defense Authorization Act to protect the American people and strengthen our security,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a floor speech ahead of the vote. “The NDAA is not perfect, but it still makes several important advances Democrats fought for to secure America’s national defense and take a strong stand against the Chinese Communist Party.”
The bill, which sets Pentagon policy for the year, passed the House 281 to 140 last week.
The must-pass legislation typically passes with widespread bipartisan support, but that changed after Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) inserted some last-minute language in the bill that would restrict the use of funds from TRICARE — the health care program for active-duty service members — for gender-affirming care for the children 18 years and younger of military members.
That led a handful of Democrats to vote against it, including Sens. Tammy Baldwin (Wis.), Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) and Ed Markey (Mass.).
A group of 21 Democratic senators attempted to block the provision in the eleventh hour, introducing an amendment Monday that would strike Johnson’s language, but the effort failed to pass.
Baldwin, who had led the push to remove the so-called poison pill, urged her colleagues to reject the NDAA, arguing that lawmakers’ commitment to U.S. service members has been “broken.”
“It has been broken because some Republicans decided that getting the rights of our service members to score cheap political points was more worthy,” she said in remarks on the Senate floor ahead of the vote.
“We’re talking about parents who are serving our country in uniform, having the right to consult their family’s doctor and get the health care they want and need for their transgender children, that’s it,” she added, noting that the provision will impact between 6,000 and 7,000 military families.
She later continued, “Some folks poisoned this bill and turned their backs on those in service and the people that we represent.”
But other Democratic senators threw their support behind it, arguing it was too important to national security to not pass.
“This is a strong, forward-looking bill that we can all be proud of,” Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Jack Reed (D-R.I.) said ahead of the vote, though he acknowledged there are “concerns that some of my colleagues have” about the legislation.
“I share many of my colleagues’ frustration that the bill includes a provision that would prohibit gender affirming health care for minors in certain circumstances,” Reed said. “Ultimately, though, we have before us a very strong National Defense Authorization Act. I am confident it will provide the Department of Defense and our military men and women with the resources they need to meet and defeat the national security threats we face.”
The fiscal 2025 NDAA, a whopping 1,800-page document, authorizes a $895 billion top line for Pentagon spending and lays out policy goals. Among the provisions included are a 14.5 percent pay raise for junior enlisted troops and a 4.5 percent increase for all other service members, along with funds to bolster the U.S. presence in the Indo-Pacific and build new warships, aircraft and vehicles.
It also includes language preventing the Defense Department from backing critical race theory — an academic framework evaluating U.S. history through the lens of racism that has become a political catch-all buzzword for any race-related teaching — in academic institutions, and puts a yearlong hiring freeze on positions related to diversity, equity and inclusion programs within the military.
The compromise legislation was unveiled earlier this month after weeks of closed-door negotiations between Democrats and Republicans.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) voted against the bill after railing against its price tag, lamenting last week that the current defense system “is designed to make huge profits for a handful of giant defense contractors while providing less of what the country needs.”
“We do not need to spend almost a trillion dollars on the military, while half a million Americans are homeless, children go hungry and elderly people are unable to afford to heat their homes in the winter,” he said in remarks on the Senate floor.
Others were hoping for a bigger budget, such as Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), soon to be the next chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). Both pressed for an additional $25 billion but were unable to make it happen.
While the NDAA authorizes Pentagon programs, it does not fund them, and Congress must separately pass an appropriations bill. With such legislation unlikely to be voted on before March, that means McConnell — taking over as head of the Defense subcommittee on the Senate Appropriations panel next year — could still boost the $895 billion top line.
“Artificial budget restraints mean that major bill provisions, like a pay raise for enlisted service members, will come at the expense of investments in the critical weapons systems and munitions that deter conflict and keep them safe,” McConnell said Monday.
“For all the talk about growing threats to America’s national security, it’s past time for an honest conversation about the military requirements to meet those needs.”
With Biden expected to quickly sign the NDAA, the bill will retain its status as having passed for more than 60 years straight.
