Most Republicans voted for the legislation, with 16 GOP lawmakers voting against it. Democrats helped move the needle with 81 voting “yes” and 124 voting “no.”

The NDAA, which was released over the weekend by congressional leaders, includes several GOP priorities such as banning transgender medical treatments for minors and limiting diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs in the military.

The 1,800-page annual defense policy bill also includes a significant pay increase, 4.5% for all service members, with the most junior enlisted members receiving an extra 10% on top of it. 

MEET THE NEW CONGRESS: THE HOUSE AND SENATE FRESHMEN ELECTED TO SERVE NEXT YEAR

Johnson framed the inclusion of the provisions as key wins for Republicans as he sought to unify his conference behind the legislation without relying on Democratic votes. 

“We spent a lot of time and effort working on it, because our servicemembers and their families deserve our best efforts. That’s why we made the landmark investments in their quality of life, as you heard, with a 14.5% pay raise for junior service members,” Johnson said during a press conference on Tuesday. “We banned TRICARE from prescribing treatments that would ultimately sterilize our kids, and we gutted the DEI bureaucracy.”

However, the measures were not enough to convince some Republican members to back the annual defense policy bill when it came to the floor on Wednesday.

Many hardline conservatives, who voted against the procedural rule to bring bills to the floor many times this Congress, did opt to vote in favor on Tuesday around, however.

“There’s a lot of things that I don’t love about it, but that’s okay, like, it’s a process working, so we’ll move the rule,” Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX) said to the Washington Examiner ahead of the rule vote. “But, you know, it’s probably not in a position that I can support the bill, but the process has to move forward.”

Roy ultimately did not vote for the NDAA Wednesday.

Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC) had expressed concern on Tuesday that the legislation contained no offsets within its text when asked by the Washington Examiner if he would support the NDAA, citing the nation’s more than $40 trillion in national debt. The concerns carried over to the floor with a “no” vote.

“The election was about starting over, was about getting this country on a financial footing. It just has no offsets,” Norman said.

JEFF HURD, COLORADO’S ‘ACCIDENTAL POLITICIAN’ WHO IS TAKING OVER BOEBERT’S OLD HOUSE SEAT

Still, other members of the House Freedom Caucus celebrated the provisions included in the the bill, with House Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris (R-MD) telling the Washington Examiner Tuesday that while he doesn’t vote for all NDAA’s, he does intend to vote for this one.

“The transgender policy is very, very important, and I think it’s a major step foward,” Harris said. “So, I’m fully supportive of it.”

Rep. Barry Moore (R-AL), another member of the Freedom Caucus, said that while the NDAA had some flaws there was a “lot of good things” in the legislation. 

“It may not be perfect, but we can’t let that be the enemy of good. But for the most part, most of my friends, even my House Freedom Caucus friends, they seem to like it,” Moore said.

But the measures also undercut support from some Democratic lawmakers, who accused Republicans of tucking in partisan policies in the must-pass spending bill that historically gains bipartisan support. 

Democrats on the Rules Committee sought Monday to attach an amendment on the NDAA to strike the section of the bill that blocked TRICARE from covering “treatment of gender dysphoria that could result in sterilization for a child under the age of 18,” but were unsuccessful.

Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-CA) said to the Washington Examiner that she thinks there is a “lot of concern” within the Democratic caucus about the “gender-affirming care language” in the NDAA bill text.

“I think it’s going to really hurt retention of service members when we’re already having a recruitment and retention crisis,” Jacobs said.

YASSAMIN ANSARI WILL LEAD DEMOCRATIC FRESHMAN CLASS WITH GLOBAL AND LOCAL POLITICAL EXPERIENCE

Democrats are also pushing against the package because it will not expand access to in vitro fertilization (IVF) for active duty members and their families — despite the House showing a bipartisan interest in expanding IVF coverage. 

“I think many of us are disappointed that the IVF provisions didn’t get into the final text,” Jacobs said. “We were able to pass it by a voice vote through the House that had broad, bipartisan support for it.”

“Congressional members and federal employees will have coverage of IVF, and it only makes sense that our service members should have the same thing,” Jacobs added.

The legislation now heads to the Senate where it will receive a floor vote later this month.

Cami Mondeaux, Annabella Rosciglione, and Jack Birle contributed to this report.