The House on Wednesday afternoon passed the $884 billion defense policy bill for 2025. The measure passed in a bipartisan 281-140 vote despite the late inclusion of a controversial measure by House Speaker Mike Johnson that would ban the Department of Defense from providing gender dysphoria treatments such as hormones and puberty blockers “that could result in sterilization” for transgender children of servicemembers.
Two hundred Republicans and 81 Democrats voted for the bill, while 124 Democrats and 16 Republicans opposed it.
The final defense plan stays within the spending caps set as part of the 2023 Fiscal Responsibility Act. It authorizes $883.7 billion for fiscal year 2025, including $849.9 billion for Pentagon programs and $33.3 billion for programs under the Department of Energy. Another $11 billion in defense funding outside the NDAA would lift total defense funding for the year to $895.2 billion, an increase of $91 billion, or 1%, over 2024 levels.
The package would provide a 14.5% pay raise for junior enlisted servicemembers and a 4.5% increase for other servicemembers, and it includes a host of other provisions intended to improve the quality of life for U.S. troops and their families. It also would deliver $15.6 billion for deterring China and strengthening defense initiatives in the Indo-Pacific region.
An earlier Senate version of the legislation would have pushed past the spending caps and lifted defense spending to $923.3 billion. Some defense hawks were disappointed that the final version of the legislation didn’t reflect the Senate plan.
“I am proud of much of the NDAA,” Republican Sen. Roger Wicker said in a statement this week. “However, the failure to include a topline increase is a tremendous loss for our national defense. Many senior flag officers, defense strategists, and other experts continue to note that this is the most dangerous moment since World War II. Not only does this NDAA thwart the bipartisan will of the Senate, but it signifies a profound missed opportunity to strengthen President-elect Trump’s hand when he takes office.”
At the same time, many Democrats object to the culture war items included in the bill, most notably the speaker’s provision on transgender care — a provision that House Armed Services Committee Chair Mike Rogers, a Republican from Alabama, told reporters did not belong in the NDAA, even as he agrees with the speaker’s position on the issue.
“There is much to celebrate in this bill thanks to the bipartisan commitment that defined the time-honored process,” Rep. Adam Smith of Washington, the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, said in a statement. “However, the corrosive effect of Speaker Johnson’s insistence on including a harmful provision puts the lives of thousands of children at risk by denying them health care and may force thousands of service members to choose between continuing their military service or leaving to ensure their child can get the health care they need. This will be felt for generations to come.”
Smith voted against the bill despite having helped to craft it.
The Senate is expected to pass the NDAA despite similar concerns by some Democrats in that chamber.
