The Senate Armed Services Committee has voted to pass its version of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2023 (NDAA), proposing to increase defense spending by approximately $ 45 billion compared to what President Biden demanded.
We will have more details on the bill, plus the recent Senate vote on a bill to increase the benefits to veterans suffering from the health effects of exposure to toxic substances, as well as recently announced details of a conversation between Biden and senior officials over rhetoric about Ukraine.
This is defense and national security, your nightly guide to the latest developments in the Pentagon, on Capitol Hill and beyond. For the Hill, I’m Ellen Mitchell. Friend to forward this newsletter to you? Subscribe here.
Senators are considering increasing the defense budget by $ 45 billion
The Senate Armed Services Committee voted 23 to 3 to pass its version of its 2023 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), proposing to increase defense spending by approximately $ 45 billion compared to what the president Biden asked.
- The measure allocates $ 857.64 billion in fiscal 2023 to national defense, according to a summary of the bill released by the committee. By comparison, the president proposed $ 813 billion in national defense spending when he presented his budget proposal in late March.
- From the top line of the bill, $ 817.33 billion will go to the Pentagon alone, while $ 29.6 billion will go to the Department of Energy. A separate $ 10.6 billion would go to other defense-related activities outside the jurisdiction of the law.
The bill now goes to the Senate, where the entire upper house will consider the bill.
Much above: The top lines are well over $ 802.4 billion, which the House Armed Services Committee is ready to consider when reviewing its version of the NDAA next Wednesday.
- The upper line of the House of Representatives bill will give the Pentagon $ 772.5 billion, the Department of Energy $ 29.5 billion and another $ 400 million for other defense-related activities outside the Department of Defense.
- It does not include an additional $ 11 billion in national defense spending outside the commission’s jurisdiction.
Coming soon: Once the House of Representatives adopts its bill, both versions will be agreed during the conference committee process in a bill that the House and Senate will have to pass.
Even then, the NDAA is a policy bill that sets funding levels and directs policy, but has no budgetary power. Therefore, a bill on appropriations will still have to be adopted.
Tackling inflation: In summary of the Senate bill, the committee says it has approved a $ 45 billion increase to “overcome the effects of inflation and speed up the implementation of the National Defense Strategy.”
Inflation quickly emerged as a key point of debate when Biden released his proposal for national defense spending earlier this year. Republicans have asked Biden to increase defense spending for fiscal 2023 by 3 to 5 percent above inflation.
Other assistance: The upper line also provides additional security assistance to Ukraine, allows accelerated production of certain ammunition and more funding for additional military construction projects and maintenance of facilities.
Read the whole story here
The Senate passes a bill on veterans exposed to toxins
The Senate on Thursday voted 84 to 14 to pass legislation expanding benefits for veterans suffering from the health effects of toxic exposures during their military service.
- First Class Sergeant Heath Robinson honors our PACT Act of 2022, among other things, extends the Department of Veterans’ Health Care to include veterans who served after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.
- The measure is now heading back to the House of Representatives, where it was passed by 256-174 votes in March, with 34 Republicans joining Democrats to improve the measure. Thursday’s legislation includes several changes to the House’s version.
- Sensor John Tester (D-Mont.) And Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) – senior members of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee – unveiled the bipartisan legislation in mid-May after a year of negotiations.
The account is named Sgt. 1st Class Heath Robinson, who is stationed in Iraq and Kosovo with the Ohio National Guard. He died in 2020 of cancer he developed as a result of exposure to burnt pits during his deployment.
A bit of background: Soldiers have been exposed to toxins throughout history, although Thursday’s legislation is largely aimed at helping veterans who were exposed to burning pits in the post-9/11 era.
- Incineration pits are open areas used to incinerate garbage and other waste such as chemicals, human waste, ammunition and food waste.
- Exposure to the chemicals found has been found to cause health problems ranging from asthma, autoimmune diseases and lung cancer, some of which can take years after exposure to develop.
“Too damn long”: In remarks in the Senate, Tester said the passage of the bill was “correcting a mistake that has been ignored for too long.”
“Generations after generations of Americans have gone to war, backed by the promise we made to them when they registered that we would take care of them when they got home,” Tester said.
“Unfortunately, this did not happen in the case of toxic exposure. We failed them, “he added.
What the bill is also doing: In addition to extending the VA care conditions for veterans after 9/11, the bill establishes a framework for the VA to establish alleged links to services related to toxic exposures. It also adds 23 conditions related to combustion and toxic exposure to the agency’s list of suspected service links.
The legislation also extends the presumption of Agent Orange – used primarily during the Vietnam War – to veterans who have served in Thailand, Cambodia, Laos and Guam, among others.
Read more here
Biden told officials to soften Ukraine’s remarks
President Biden told Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin and Secretary of State Anthony Blinken in April to soften their rhetoric in support of Ukraine in its war against Russia, NBC News reported on Thursday.
- The repulse reportedly came after the Pentagon chief said the Biden administration wanted Ukraine to win the war against the Kremlin and that the United States wanted a weakened Russia that could not launch another attack. Blinken then publicly joined Austin’s comments, sparking a wave of news reports.
- “We want to see Russia weakened to the point that it cannot do the things it did when it invaded Ukraine,” Austin said at the time after cabinet members visited Kyiv.
Dissatisfied: During a later conference call, Biden told the two officials that he thought their remarks had gone too far and to mitigate them, many current and former administration officials familiar with the conversation told NBC. .
An unidentified official told the network that Biden was concerned that Austin’s words could set unrealistic goals and increase Washington’s chances of being embroiled in a direct conflict with Moscow.
“Biden was not happy when Blinken and Austin talked about victory in Ukraine,” said one source. “He was not happy with the rhetoric.”
- Following an improperly managed and chaotic attack on Ukraine that began on February 24, Russia consolidated its forces in mid-April to attack the country’s eastern Donbass region.
- The battle was bloody and is expected to turn into a protracted war, with President Vladimir Zelensky begging for more weapons to repel the invasion and remaining steadfast to ensure that Ukrainian territory is not ceded to Russia.
Concerns: But US officials are becoming increasingly concerned that Ukraine’s views are untenable, saying that behind the scenes, the Ukrainian president must change his public position and “take it back a little”, one of seven current US officials, former US officials. officials and European officials told NBC.
Experts and US and European officials have expressed confidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin will try to claim Donbass and declare it Russian territory, at which point Zelensky must negotiate peace to end the conflict.
No pressure: The Biden administration, meanwhile, says it will not put pressure on Kyiv to end the war under any specific conditions and is preparing for a long war.
“From the very beginning, I have said and I have been – not everyone agrees with me – nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine. This is their territory. I will not tell them what they should and should not do, “Biden said on June 3. “But it seems to me that at some point there will have to be an agreement through negotiations. And I don’t know what that means. ”
Read the whole story here
WHAT WE READ
Delta pilots say they flew a “record amount of overtime” amid flight cancellations More than 400,000 bottles of over-the-counter drugs have been withdrawn due to child protection issues
This is for today. Check out The Hill’s Defense and National Security pages for the latest coverage. I’ll see you tomorrow!
SEE THE FULL VERSION HERE
Add Comment