Senate’s defense budget of $886 billion is similar to the House plan, but with less emphasis on ‘anti-woke’ matters.

The Future of National Defense Budget

The House and Senate have proposed their versions of the Fiscal Year 2024 National Defense Authorization Acts (FY24 NDAA). These acts, which outline the national defense budget for the next fiscal year, are set for floor adoptions, intra-chamber conferencing throughout the summer, and hopeful adoption by late September.

Both proposed FY24 NDAAs reflect the same $886.3 billion top-line figure submitted by President Joe Biden in March. However, they differ in how the funds are allocated.

The Senate version earmarks $876.8 billion in defense spending, while the House’s version outlines $874.2 billion. Despite these differences, both plans estimate varied non-defense appropriations to reach the top-line figure requested by the administration and the Pentagon.

Both plans also include a 5.2-percent pay raise for service members, increased funding for a second Virginia-class attack submarine, support for a 31-ship amphibious force, and increased funding for retaining F-15s and F-16s.

The specific military details within the budget will be sorted out in the coming days, including in The Epoch Times.

Addressing Cultural Issues

The House Armed Services Committee’s adopted NDAA includes nearly two dozen amendments related to various cultural issues. These amendments were adopted in near-party line votes, with a majority of the panel’s members being Republicans.

Some of the issues addressed in the House’s NDAA include outlawing critical race theory (CRT), diversity, equity, inclusion (DEI), environmental, social, governance (ESG) financial scoring, transgender and gay enlistment, and on-base drag shows. These amendments aim to counter what some consider “woke” policies, including exemptions from greenhouse gas regulations.

On the other hand, the Senate’s NDAA does not include these explicit provisions. However, it does include Senator Roger Wicker’s proposed “Military Merit, Fairness, and Equality Act of 2023” (Merit Act), which aims to preserve the performance-based war-fighting ethos of the military and address concerns about the Department of Defense’s “equity” agenda.

The Senate’s NDAA also does not include seven amendments adopted by the House Armed Services Committee related to COVID-19 and other vaccine mandates.

Different Budget Processes

The House Armed Services Committee approved its FY24 NDAA in a 58-1 vote during a public hearing, while the Senate Armed Services Committee did so following a closed classified hearing in a 24-1 tally.

As of June 25, the Senate has only released a 33-page executive summary of its proposed plan, which is less detailed than the 416-page draft NDAA approved by the House Armed Services Committee.

Once the Senate and House pass their versions of the NDAA, conflicts within the plans will be reconciled in bicameral conferencing throughout the summer. The final plan will then be presented for adoption to both chambers and presented to President Biden for signing.

The NDAA must be adopted before the new fiscal year begins on Oct. 1, according to the new debt-ceiling law. Failure to do so would result in a 1-percent across-the-board spending trim.

The exact dates for the floor adoptions in July are still uncertain. However, both chambers will convene in July to discuss the NDAA.

Allocation of Funds

Under the Senate’s plan, the Department of Defense (DOD) will receive $844.3 billion, $2 billion more than the Biden administration requested. The Senate also allocates $34.4 billion for the Department of Energy’s nuclear weapons program.

The Senate’s NDAA “top line” for direct defense allocations is $876.8 billion, while the House’s is $874.2 billion. The Senate estimates defense-related activities outside the DOD at $9.5 billion, while the House estimates it at $12.1 billion.

Conclusion

The proposed FY24 NDAAs reflect the ongoing discussions and debates surrounding national defense budgeting. The House and Senate have different approaches to addressing cultural issues and allocating funds. As the plans go through the conferencing process, the final version will be shaped, and the future of the national defense budget will become clearer.