The US House of Representatives has approved the $895 billion National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) on Wednesday, despite a contentious provision on gender-affirming care that triggered backlash from Democrats and threatened to derail the crucial bill.
The legislation, which is set to fund the Defence Department for the fiscal year 2025, passed by a vote of 281 to 140. The 1,800-page bill saw the majority of Democrats oppose it, although 81 joined 200 Republicans in support. Only 16 Republicans voted against the bill, which now moves to the Senate for further approval.
The approval came after a deal was struck over the weekend, with Congress leaders negotiating on provisions that have traditionally passed with bipartisan support. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries acknowledged that the NDAA contained "a lot of positive things" achieved through bipartisan negotiation, but also noted "troubling" provisions. Jeffries explained that Democrats had not formally whipped the vote, leaving it to be decided on a "member-to-member, case-by-case" basis.
Meanwhile, House Speaker Mike Johnson lauded the bill, calling it "critical" for both troops and the country. He emphasised that it included vital wins, such as a 14.5% pay raise for junior service members and improvements to housing for military families. Johnson also highlighted the expansion of joint military exercises with Israel and increased funding for defence initiatives in the Indo-Pacific region.
"The safety and security of the American people is our top priority," Johnson said in a statement. "This year's NDAA ensures our military has the resources and capabilities needed to remain the most powerful fighting force on the planet."
In addition to these provisions, the bill contains controversial elements, notably one restricting gender-affirming care for children of service members and halting funding for "critical race theory" courses at military academies. Johnson defended these measures, claiming that House Republicans had "gutted the DEI bureaucracy" through the legislation.
However, the inclusion of such provisions, especially regarding gender-affirming care, sparked significant opposition. Representative Adam Smith of Washington, the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, voiced concerns over the bill’s partisan nature. While Smith acknowledged some bipartisan achievements, he criticised the provision banning gender-affirming care for children, which he described as "wrong" and a "level of partisanship not traditionally seen in defence bills."
The provision, which applies to the military's healthcare program, prohibits medical interventions for gender dysphoria that could lead to sterilisation for children under the age of 18. Smith accused Speaker Johnson of "pandering to the most extreme elements of his party" to secure his leadership, effectively undermining the traditionally bipartisan process.
House Republicans have been divided on the speaker’s race, and Johnson will need to maintain support from a slim majority when the new Congress convenes in January. The debate over the NDAA, however, highlighted the tensions within the Republican Party, particularly as hard-right members push for more conservative policies.
Meanwhile, President-elect Donald Trump and his allies have ramped up anti-transgender rhetoric on the campaign trail ahead of the 2024 election. House Republicans have also led an effort to restrict the use of single-sex bathrooms in the Capitol complex, limiting access to those matching users' "biological sex." This push follows the election of the first transgender member of Congress.
The passage of the NDAA marks a significant step in securing military funding for the year ahead, but the heated debate over its provisions signals the growing influence of culture war issues in US politics.
COMMENTS
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ