October 16, 2021

Volume XI, Number 289

Advertisement
Advertisement

October 15, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

October 14, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

October 13, 2021

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

The Latest on the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)

On Tuesday, the House Rules Committee advanced a structured rule for House floor consideration of 476 amendments to the Fiscal Year 2022 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

The NDAA provides annual authorization of appropriations for the Department of Defense (DOD) and defense-related activities at other federal agencies. Congressional appropriations committees are responsible for providing budget authority, while the NDAA provides guidance on how defense-related funds should be used, establishes national security policies and restrictions, and creates or continues national security programs. Viewed as “must-pass” legislation, the NDAA routinely carries a range of policy and programmatic matters not directly related to national defense.

During the full committee’s markup of the NDAA in September, more than a dozen House Armed Services Committee (HASC) Democrats defied President Biden by joining with Republicans to increase the Pentagon’s budget to $740 billion from the $715 billion requested by the White House. Even those that opposed the increase acknowledge and respect that outcome. HASC Chair Adam Smith, for example, said Monday,

I think the Biden budget was right, but I do believe in democracy. We had a vote and I lost and I support the bill.”

Rules Committee Chairman McGovern shared the same perspective,

from my vantage point, I think we spend too much on our military budget. But I’m clearly in the minority after listening to everybody here speak today.”

Late Tuesday, the House began general debate and amendment votes with the process expected to carry into Wednesday and Thursday. A package of several uncontroversial amendments will be considered (and likely adopted) as one large en bloc amendment, while more contentious items will be considered as individual amendments.

The House will spend much of Wednesday and Thursday debating and voting on impactful amendments and voting as to whether these amendments will be included in the House version of the NDAA. Democrats will attempt to pull back the reported increase, offering an amendment to decrease the bill’s topline number to the President’s original $715 billion request and otherwise cut the NDAA topline funding level by 10 percent. Additional noteworthy amendments cleared by the Rules Committee that are now subject to the full House vote include the following amendments that would:

  • Add the bipartisan SAFE Banking Act, which allows state-legal cannabis businesses to access the banking system and help improve public safety by reducing the amount of cash at these businesses;

  • Expand and codify sanctions on Russian sovereign debt;

  • Expand the FY21 NDAA to explicitly include semiconductor materials; and

  • Require the Department of Defense to establish plans to clean up contaminated military sites where the military failed to clean-up newly discovered contaminates.

On June 22, the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) voted 23-3 to advance its version of the FY22 NDAA. The Senate has yet to release the SASC-passed bill but did release an executive summary.  At this point, it is expected that the SASC-passed NDAA will be brought to the Senate Floor the week of October 18th.

Upon passage of their respective bills, Congressional leaders from both chambers will meet to conference the final legislation, though initial staff-level discussions or “pre-conferencing” on especially uncontroversial provisions in both bills may have already begun.  Timing for conference legislation is uncertain, as prioritization of the NDAA depends on competing legislation such as federal funding, reconciliation, the debt limit, and infrastructure, but passage of the annual defense bill is expected in both chambers with bipartisan support, likely before the end of the year.

We will continue to follow the FY22 NDAA process closely. Opportunities to advance a variety of policy priorities will continue in the Senate, and again possibly during the conference process.

© Copyright 2021 Squire Patton Boggs (US) LLPNational Law Review, Volume XI, Number 265
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

About this Author

Austin Harrison Public Policy Attorney Squire Patton Boggs Washington DC
Associate

Austin Harrison, a member of our Public Policy Strategic Advocacy Practice, draws upon domestic and international policy experience to advise clients on matters involving administrative law, land use matters and various public policy matters, including authorizing legislation, appropriations and working with Congress to address agency actions.

Austin counsels clients in a variety of areas, including defense, energy and environment, transportation, agriculture and regulatory matters involving cannabis, hemp and CBD. He assists clients in developing comprehensive regulatory and...

202-457-6331
Pablo Carrillo Government Policies Attorney Squire Patton Boggs Law Firm
Of Counsel

Pablo E. Carrillo served as Chief of Staff to US Senator John McCain, Chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee and former US presidential candidate. He was responsible for the development and implementation of the Senator’s legislative and congressional oversight strategy.

Pablo also served as Minority General Counsel of the Senate Armed Services Committee, where he advised the Ranking Member and other Republican Senators on the defense authorization bill and the Minority’s oversight and investigative activities, as well as defense acquisition and contracting policy. He was the...

202 457 6415
Ludmilla Kasulke Trade Attorney Squire Patton Boggs Washington DC
Senior Associate

Ludmilla (Milla) Kasulke draws on her experience in both domestic and international policy to assist clients on trade matters. Milla provides multinational corporations, sovereign governments and entities, and quasi-government entities with advice on a wide range of trade policy, legal, and regulatory issues. She has been actively engaged in all aspects of the Section 232 process, including the exclusion petition process, and regularly advises clients on the impacts of current and potential new actions. Milla also regularly counsels clients on the impacts of current and potential new trade...

202-457-5125
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement