On December 11, 2024, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for the 2025 fiscal year with a significant bipartisan majority of 281-140. The passage followed a heated debate surrounding a contentious transgender treatment provision added by House Speaker Mike Johnson, which faced opposition from Democrats. The critical defense policy bill, which amounts to approximately $895 billion, includes vital funding aims to bolster military readiness, with a prominent focus on enhancing military salaries and benefits for service members. It is expected to move to the Senate soon for further deliberation.
The NDAA, which spans 1,813 pages, represents a compromise reached between earlier proposals from both the House and Senate Armed Services Committees. This new version allocates $849.9 billion to the Department of Defense (DOD), $33.3 billion for defense programs managed by the Department of Energy, and additional funding for related defense activities. Notable provisions within the NDAA include a substantial pay increase—14.5% for junior enlisted ranks and 4.5% for others—as well as investments aimed at improving the overall quality of life for service members and their families. This includes increased allowances and funding for childcare and employment support for military spouses, addressing issues tied to low morale and family stress within the ranks.
A significant focus of the 2025 NDAA is improving U.S. military capabilities in the Indo-Pacific region, especially in response to China’s growing military assertiveness. The bill allocates $15.6 billion for the Pacific Deterrence Initiative, which supports efforts to strengthen China-facing military forces and enhance deterrent capabilities. The compromise NDAA also includes funding for seven new warships, enhancements to submarine and stealth bomber programs, and efforts to prevent Chinese access to sensitive information.
Cultural and ideological disputes posed challenges for the NDAA’s progression through Congress, with both chambers initially proposing differing measures regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives within the military. The House’s earlier version of the bill sought to eliminate DEI positions altogether and restrict funding for various health-related services. However, in the compromise version, measures to completely remove DEI positions were discarded, although a hiring freeze remains in place. Notably, the compromise NDAA prohibits DOD healthcare benefits for gender-transitioning treatments for minors, further highlighting the ongoing cultural debates within military policy.
Both sides of the aisle expressed their respective victories in the negotiations surrounding the NDAA. Republicans claim to have advanced their agenda against what they term “radical woke ideology” by maintaining the hiring freeze for DEI positions, while Democrats assert that they successfully blocked many of the more controversial provisions impacting reproductive health and protections for specific communities. However, some Democrats, such as House Armed Services ranking member Adam Smith, voiced concerns about the implications of denying healthcare provisions linked to gender identity and called for further revisions.
Despite the compromises achieved, numerous legislative provisions sought by both the Senate and House were not adopted in the final version of the NDAA. A significant amendment proposing required disclosures of U.S.-based investments in sensitive technology sectors abroad was not included, nor was a measure aimed at creating a dedicated drone corps within the Army. The bill does feature an assessment directive for the Secretary of Defense centered on Mexican military capabilities related to countering transnational crime, suggesting a continued commitment to addressing evolving security challenges both domestically and internationally as Congress works to finalize the defense authorization for the year.
