House Passes Defense Bill Limiting Use of Force Against Iran
Setting up clash in Senate, bill would also block border-wall funding, new Guantanamo detentions
WASHINGTON—The House of Representatives passed an annual defense-policy bill that would prohibit the use of federal funds for military operations against Iran without congressional consent and repeal the 2002 authorization of force against Iraq.
The bill, which passed 220-197, also included a salary increase for military service members and paid family leave for all federal workers.
The White House had warned that President Trump would veto the measure even before the Iran amendment was added Friday. No House Republicans voted in favor of the defense-policy bill.
The Senate passed its own version of the bill last month with strong bipartisan support, 86-8. Now lawmakers will start negotiations to reconcile the two pieces of legislation.
Rep. Adam Smith (D., Wash.), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, chided his Republican colleagues for not supporting the defense-policy bill, which traditionally receives bipartisan backing regardless of which party controls Congress.
“I am proud that House Democrats stood together in the face of partisan rhetoric while, unfortunately, our Republican colleagues turned their backs on the men and women who defend our nation, and instead choose to use them as political pawns,” Mr. Smith said.
The House bill would authorize $733 billion in fiscal year 2020 for the Defense Department and Energy Department’s national security programs, representing a roughly 2% increase over the previous year’s funding level and amounting to the largest defense budget ever. The Senate’s bill would approve $750 billion in spending, the level requested by the White House.
Both the House and Senate bills would give troops a 3.1% pay raise and approve funds to upgrade military housing. They also would require a tenant bill of rights to protect military families in privatized housing.
The House bill includes a provision that would guarantee 12 weeks of paid leave for federal employees who are new parents or who have to take time off to care for a family member or recover from a serious health condition. The Senate bill would give paid parental leave only to civilian intelligence-community personnel.
Among the provisions in the House bill that are expected to face resistance in the Senate is a prohibition on funds being used for a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border. Other controversial provisions would ban new detainees from being sent to the Guantanamo Bay prison camp in Cuba, bar funds from being spent to deploy low-yield nuclear missile warheads on submarines and forbid spending to wage war against Iran without Congress’s explicit consent.
Related Video
0:33
“This is a historic moment for Congress,” said Rep. Ro Khanna (D., Calif.), who sponsored the Iran amendment. “With more than 25 Republicans voting in favor of passage, this amendment is proof that opposition to war with Iran transcends partisan politics. Some of the president’s closest allies voted for this amendment,” Mr. Khanna said.
Twenty-seven Republicans and Rep. Justin Amash, who recently left the GOP to become an independent, voted in favor of the amendment. No Republicans voted against final passage of the underlying defense-policy bill, however. A similar amendment failed in the Senate last month.
Another amendment added to the bill would revoke the 2002 authorization of military force in Iraq. The amendment’s sponsor, Rep. Barbara Lee (D., Calif.), said the authorization no longer serves any operational purpose.
“It is far past time we remove this unnecessary and outdated authorization,” Ms. Lee said.
Rep. Tom Cole (R., Okla.) said Democrats expected Republican votes without dealing enough with Republican priorities.
Mr. Cole, who voted for the Iran amendment, said that Friday was the first time he had ever voted against an annual defense-policy bill, whether in a Democratic or Republican controlled Congress.
He said the partisan divisions would disadvantage House negotiators as lawmakers and their staffs worked to reconcile the two chambers’ versions in the coming weeks.
“Whatever we end up with will be a lot closer to the Senate version than it’s going to be to this version,” Mr. Cole said. “In the end, if we have a bill in the Senate that is at the president’s [funding] number and we’ve got the policy we think is appropriate on low-yield nuclear weapons and we’ve still got the prohibition on Guantanamo, why would we vote for this?”
Democrats countered that the House bill includes Republican priorities such as a repeal of existing law requiring military surviving spouses to forfeit some or all of the annuity they receive when their spouse is killed, a problem critics refer to as the widow’s tax. That language was added to the bill in an amendment that had 365 co-sponsors, 163 of whom were Republicans.
Write to Lindsay Wise at lindsay.wise@wsj.com
No comments:
Post a Comment