Lawmakers Face Divisive Fights On $884b Defense Bill

Congressional negotiators are facing roadblocks over divisive, culture war amendments on a 1,800-page National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that addresses core U.S. priorities on national security.

The $883.7 billion NDAA includes widely supported measures like boosting the U.S. presence in the Indo-Pacific, pay raises for troops, funding the building of seven new ships and shoring up the defense industrial base.  

Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said the NDAA for fiscal 2025, which lays out the priorities for Congress to fund in separate defense appropriation bills, “refocuses our military on its core mission of defending America and its interests around the globe.” 

“This legislation also reinforces our commitment to America’s brave men and women in uniform, and their families, by making landmark investments in their quality of life,” he said in a statement. 

But the legislation includes language that Democrats are already objecting to, including restrictions on coverage of gender-affirming care for transgender children of service members and a provision aimed at curtailing diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs within the military. 

The House tentatively plans to vote on the NDAA on Wednesday, though that is dependent on the bill getting past the Rules Committee on Monday evening.  

Here’s what to know about the NDAA and the key battles ahead, as both the House and Senate prepare to vote on the bill. 

Transgender restrictions 

The most controversial amendment in the defense bill is a restriction on the children of U.S. service members from receiving medical treatment if they are diagnosed with gender dysphoria. 

Democrats have blasted the provision as a measure that takes aim at transgender youth. 

Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), ranking member on the House Armed Services Committee, said Johnson is “pandering to the most extreme elements of his party to ensure that he retains his speakership,” accusing him of trashing a typical bipartisan process. 

“Blanketly denying health care to people who clearly need it, just because of a biased notion against transgender people, is wrong,” Smith said in a statement. “This provision injected a level of partisanship not traditionally seen in defense bills.” 

The pro-LGBTQ advocacy group Human Rights Campaign accused Republicans of playing “politics with the healthcare of children of servicemembers.” 

“This is not leadership, it’s bullying, and it is a direct attack on military families,” said Human Rights Campaign President Kelley Robinson in a statement. “This cruel and hateful bill suddenly strips away access to medical care for families that members of our armed forces are counting on, and it could force servicemembers to choose between staying in the military or providing healthcare for their children.” 

Diversity, equity and inclusion programs  

The NDAA also has an amendment that targets DEI programs, which Republicans have long been critical of for focusing the military on race, gender identity and sexual orientation instead of military strength. 

The bill would restrict the Department of Defense from creating any new positions related to DEI a year after the NDAA is passed. 

It’s unclear if Democrats are prepared to oppose this measure, but they have resisted GOP attempts to ban DEI initiatives in the past. 

GOP lawmakers, meanwhile, may allow the more contentious, “culture war” provisions to be left out of the bill to get it passed, with the anticipation that the incoming Trump administration will cut back such policies when it takes power in January. 

IVF treatment 

During the NDAA discussions between the House Armed Services Committee and the Senate Armed Services Committee, some lawmakers had called to keep in the bill the inclusion of expanded in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment coverage in the military’s health care service, known as TRICARE. 

Specifically, lawmakers wanted TRICARE to fully cover IVF, similar to coverage enjoyed by civilian federal employees. But the amendment is not included in the final NDAA package.

That was a particularly big issue for Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), who had called for its inclusion.

Leaving the provision out could lead some lawmakers to push for the amendment to be included again. 

Quality of life wins 

Both Republicans and Democrats praised efforts in the NDAA to boost the quality of life for service members after recommendations from a bipartisan panel formed last year were included in the bill. 

Among the biggest wins for both sides is a 14.5 percent pay raise for junior-enlisted service members, a major new proposal this year that a bipartisan group of lawmakers had pushed along with military organizations. All service members would get a 4.5 percent pay raise. 

Another measure in the bill would expand eligibility for the Basic Needs Allowance for service members by increasing the income cap from 150 percent of the federal poverty guidelines to 200 percent. The stipend is meant to alleviate food insecurity. 

The bill also includes several provisions meant to improve barracks on military installations, such as providing free wireless internet, a requirement for the Pentagon to create a digital system for maintenance requests and the authorization of $1.2 billion to renovate and build new barracks.  

Other provisions would allow service members to seek some specialty health care without referrals, make it easier for military spouses to transfer professional licenses between states, and require on-base child care workers to be paid a wage competitive with the private sector. 

Other measures  

The NDAA also has several other amendments touted separately by conservatives and Democrats and some championed by both parties. 

Johnson pointed to several amendments that he said were wins for the GOP. 

One provision would ban the Department of Defense from working with vendors that have boycotted Israel, and another would prohibt the Pentagon from contracting with advertising firms that blacklist conservative news sources.   

This year, lawmakers also cut some $35 billion from the NDAA in what Johnson said were wasteful or inefficient programs at the Pentagon. 

House Democrats, who said they blocked several controversial amendments in the NDAA during conference, praised amendments to expand Pentagon efforts to mitigate blast exposure. 

Democrats also pointed to amendments to require the Pentagon to come up with a plan to resolve deficiencies with the F-35 program and to increase oversight and competition with the Sentinel nuclear missile program. 

The bill would also boost U.S. funding in the Indo-Pacific to counter China, provide $17.5 billion for military construction projects and create a Taiwan Security Cooperation Initiative, modeled after a Ukraine program that allows the U.S. to purchase from private industry for an ally. 

It also calls for the construction of seven battle force ships, including a Virginia-class submarine, the procurement of around 200 aircraft and more than 300 ground vehicles.