The annual defense authorization bill, a fixture of congressional routine for 65 years, is facing a serious threat this year as partisan divisions deepen. The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), typically a bipartisan must-pass measure, is now mired in disputes over its historic $1.15 trillion price tag and the ongoing conflict with Iran, raising the possibility that the streak could be broken.
Democrats are pressing for a reduction of hundreds of billions of dollars from the topline and are demanding restrictions on the administration's military actions against Iran, which resumed in February without congressional authorization. These demands put them on a collision course with the Trump administration, which insists on the full funding level and shows no signs of seeking a peace deal that would satisfy Democratic concerns.
Mackenzie Eaglen, a defense budget expert at the American Enterprise Institute, described the current situation as the widest gap she has ever witnessed between a “nightmare scenario” of no NDAA and the alternative of a defense bill bundled with a third reconciliation package. “The politics are absolutely dismal between the two branches right now,” she said. Eaglen warned that breaking the streak could have lasting consequences: “We are living in a norm-shattering time of great disruption, including in politics. Once red lines are crossed, it is difficult to go backward. I fear the necessary and bipartisan NDAA is fragile in this new era but hope I’m wrong.”
The bill’s rocky path became evident in June when the House Armed Services Committee advanced its version by a 44-12 vote, with only half of the committee’s Democrats supporting it. Typically, only one or two Democrats would oppose the bill at this stage. In July, the full House passed the NDAA by a narrow 216-212 vote, a sharp departure from the broad bipartisan coalitions that have historically backed the legislation.
The Senate has faced even greater hurdles. In July, senators failed to invoke cloture on their version of the NDAA, with a 50-46 vote falling short of the 60-vote threshold. Democrats opposed the bill over top-line spending levels and the administration’s handling of the Iran war. Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) called the move “unprecedented.”
A defense industry expert familiar with the negotiations suggested that Republicans are likely to hold firm on the $1.15 trillion figure, giving Democrats leverage to extract concessions in conference. However, even if a compromise is reached, the bill could still face a presidential veto. “I think there’s a lot of things the Democrats will ask for, including possibly some language on Iran, but I think that it still becomes harder to pass,” the expert said.
As of late this month, House and Senate lawmakers are engaged in informal talks to find a path forward. Staff-level work on the bill is complete, and unresolved issues have been elevated to the staff director level. The so-called “Big Four” — the chairs and ranking members of the House and Senate armed services committees — are expected to take up the legislation after the November midterm elections, with a goal of finalizing it by Thanksgiving.
Another contentious element is the Pentagon’s request to formally rename the Department of Defense as the “Department of War.” Both the House and Senate versions of the NDAA include language to codify the change, but Democrats have dismissed it as unnecessary semantics. Other culture-war provisions may be dropped during negotiations, while language related to the Iran conflict could be added.
The most pressing issue remains the war in Iran, whose cost has escalated to $47 billion, up more than $3 billion since last month. President Trump is reportedly considering strikes against Tehran after the midterms. The Senate previously defeated a House-passed resolution to withdraw U.S. troops from the conflict, but growing unease among Republican senators, combined with the possibility of a Democratic majority after the elections, could open the door to reining in the administration.
Despite the obstacles, lawmakers express determination to pass the bill. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) emphasized its importance: “It’s very important. You know, we’re in very dangerous times. There’s a lot going on. We have to come together and get it done.” Lobbyist Michael Herson, president of American Defense International, predicted a bumpy process but noted that “it has been bumpy the last several years” and expects the NDAA to ultimately pass.
