The House last Friday morning approved its version of the fiscal year 2025 defense authorization bill on the back of strong Republican support for the $883.7 billion measure as all but six Democrats stood in opposition due to disagreements over social and healthcare provisions.
Ultimately, Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee (HASC), expects differences between the parties to be worked out before the FY ’25 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) becomes law.
Smith said 98 percent of what is in the bill is “really good, outstanding work,” citing progress on quality-of-life issues for military service members and their families, and military modernization efforts. Still, he voted no due to the poison pill provision but said, “in the end, we will work it out.”
The Servicemember Quality of Life Improvement and National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2025 (H.R. 8070) passed by a vote of 217 to 199. Three Republicans and 196 Democrats opposed the bill. The final NDAA will await conference negotiations between the House and Senate.
On Friday, the House by voice vote passed an amendment offered by Rep. Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas) that would require the Defense Department to establish a panel to review whether pricing on sole-source contracts for munitions and weapons, and related services and spare parts, is “fair and reasonable.” Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.) co-sponsored the amendment.
HASC Chairman Mike Rogers (R-Ala.), who opposes the amendment, said he would back Doggett for now if he agreed to work with him on it in conference. Doggett accepted. Rogers said he opposed the amendment because of concerns it duplicates existing policies to root out waste, fraud, and abuse, and is unsure how it will be executed.
Smith outlined three areas of the House NDAA that Democrats are against and that were included in amendments that were approved as part of debate on the House floor. The first area of concern is a prohibition on Pentagon policy that provides leave and travel costs for servicemembers and their dependents to go out of state for an abortion from a state that prohibits abortions.
The second point of opposition is related to “severe” healthcare restrictions for transgender servicemembers and their families, Smith said, adding that the healthcare someone may need should be decided between those serving in the military and their doctors, not for Congress.
Finally, Smith said the ongoing “epic fight over diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI) and the bill’s opposition to anything DEI ignores the fact that DoD and military leaders at times will have to grapple with these issues. And so, DoD “very sensibly” has some people focused on these issues, he said.