Defense Bill Amendments your Rep should vote for (Part 1)

Climate change, ending wars, & demilitarizing the cops - a guide to the NDAA amendments

Welcome back to “Fog of War,” a newsletter where I help demystify the things going on in politics, policy, and progressive organizing today, with a particular emphasis on foreign policy.

But before we dive in, please help spread the word by sharing “Fog of War" and encouraging people you know to subscribe.

Each year, Congress passes a handful of massive, must-pass bills “authorizing” the various major agencies and programs of our government. One of the largest and most complex is the “National Defense Authorization Act” or NDAA, which authorizes and (without getting too in the weeds) sets funding levels for the U.S. military and related national security programs.

Congress is currently almost done drafting the NDAA covering next year. And given the structural anti-democracy bias of the Senate and the gerrymandered House, quite possibly the last NDAA for years to come that will be written while Democrats control both chambers of Congress. Over the coming week, the House of Representatives will be finalizing the bill by debating and voting on 650 different proposed amendments, narrowed down (and re-numbered) from more than 1,200 submitted. If an amendment passes, it will be attached to the House version of the bill and have a good chance of passing into law as long as it makes it through the process where the House and the Senate leadership get together and reconcile their two versions to make them match.

Why does this matter?
Progressives have a crucial opportunity over the next several days to rally support for a number of amendments to the NDAA. Some of these amendments are transformative, others are more incremental, but they would represent real progress on the issues we care about - from climate change, racial justice, ending forever wars, demilitarizing the police, protecting democracy from fascist coup attempts, to ending the failed “war on drugs,” and more.

I’ve gone through all 650 of the amendments that will be voted on by your Representative in Congress between now and July 19th, and aggregated the ones that I feel are most significant for progressives, especially veterans like me.

While other amendments contain lots of significant policies, for the purposes of this newsletter I’m less interested in the traditional “national security” and “geopolitics” stuff, and more focused on why average progressives reading this should care about the NDAA. But if you want to see the full list of amendments up for consideration, you can find it here (spoiler alert: there are many, many, many amendments about China).

I hope you use this email as a resource to contact your member of Congress.

I’ve organized the amendments by category, based on the issue they relate to. Unless otherwise indicated, I believe these are good amendments, and you should tell you Rep to vote “yes” on them. The numbers are official, so you can tell your Rep to “support amendment #13, formerly #166, to the NDAA, from Barbara Lee.”

Pentagon Spending

Let’s start with the big stuff that will get the most attention in the media: how much money we are spending on war, troops, and weapons.

The current NDAA is on track to authorize more than $800 billion for the Pentagon next year. For context, that’s a lot of money. President Biden’s “Build Back Better” plan that passed the House but died in the Senate was $1.7 trillion dollars (about double), but that $1.7 trillion dollars was to be spent over 10 years. The NDAA is only 1 year of spending. So a fair comparison would be $800 billion for the Pentagon, $170 billion per year for Build Back Better for everything from climate action (including a Civilian Climate Corps creating 300k jobs), 4 weeks of paid sick and parental leave, universal free pre-K for all kids, the child tax credit that briefly cut child poverty in half, affordable housing programs, and much much more.

This is all the more criminal because in 2017, after Donald Trump took over the White House and Republicans took over complete control of Congress, they massively hiked the compromise Pentagon budget between President Obama and the congressional GOP from $645B to $700B, and further increased it over the four years of Trump’s presidency.

Instead of President Biden and the Democratic trifecta in Congress restoring things merely to the levels they were under Obama, they effectively normalized this out of control GOP military budget, and some Democrats who represent the weapons industry want to increase it even further. The current $800B draft is $37B higher than even President Biden requested. Remember, the entirety of the climate spending in Build Back Better was “only” $50B per year.

Any member of Congress who wants to call themselves a progressive should be expected to take a stand. Tell your Rep to vote “yes” on all of these amendments.

This first Barbara Lee amendment is similar to ones in past years led by Senator Bernie Sanders and Rep Mark Pocan, and puts everyone on the record on whether they think we should restore the military budget back to the levels they were at under Obama (accounting for inflation).

13. Lee, Barbara (CA) #166 Reduces the FY23 NDAA topline by $100b, while holding harmless personnel, civilian pay and benefits, and the Defense Health Program. Cites a 2021 CBO study that detailed workable options for a $100b/yr reduction in defense spending.
Co-sponsors: Pocan (WI), DeFazio (OR), Watson Coleman (NJ), Huffman (CA), Espaillat (NY), Gomez (CA), Blumenauer (OR), Davis, Danny K. (IL)

The second Barbara Lee amendment merely rolls back the extra amount Congress wants to give the Pentagon beyond what President Biden even asked for.

14. Lee, Barbara (CA) #169 Reverses the $36.987 billion increase made at HASC markup above the President's FY23 request, restoring the FY23 topline to the amount requested by the President.
Co-sponsors: Pocan (WI), Jacobs, Sara (CA), Watson Coleman (NJ), Welch (VT), Moore (WI), Espaillat (NY), Gomez (CA), Blumenauer (OR), Davis, Danny K. (IL)

This next amendment by Pramila Jayapal is also really important. Currently, the Pentagon gets even more money than the already-bloated budgets Congress gives it by submitting an “unfunded priorities list,” which in practice turns into a Christmas wish-list that Congress rubber-stamps. This circumvents the normal budget process. Tell your Rep to vote “yes” to eliminate this unfunded priorities list mechanism.

15. Jayapal (WA) #400 Repeals the statutory requirement for the Defense Department to submit unfunded priorities lists to Congress.
Co-sponsors: Garamendi (CA), Lowenthal (CA), Tlaib (MI), Levin, Andy (MI), Gomez (CA), Grijalva (AZ), Cohen (TN), Schakowsky (IL), Moulton (MA)

These final three amendments, led by two “Squad” members Jamaal Bowman & Cori Bush, as well as Nikema Williams (who succeeded John Lewis), promote transparency around how much money is being spent on war, and who is profiting from it. Tell your Rep to vote yes. The Williams amendment “modernizes” the transparency law by replacing “Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria” with “anywhere the U.S. is engaged in overseas contingency operations,” in recognition that the Forever Wars have spread across the globe with little legal justification under the Constitution.

105. Bowman (NY) #1101 Requires public disclosure about the cost of the United States overseas military footprint.
Co-sponsors: DeFazio (OR)

115. Bush, Cori (MO) #1022 Studies the amount of funding provided to defense contractors for procuring replacement stocks of covered systems for the United States in Ukraine.

376. Williams (GA) #608 Modernizes the bipartisan 2017 law passed by Congressman John Lewis — which currently requires public posting of the costs to each American taxpayer of the costs of the Wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria — to include cost transparency for all wars since 9/11 and future wars, ensuring taxpayers fully understand how their government uses taxpayer dollars abroad.
Co-sponsors: Meijer (MI), Jacobs, Sara (CA), Khanna (CA), Spartz (IN), Lee, Barbara (CA), Welch (VT), Blumenauer (OR), Newman (IL), Carson (IN), Moore (WI), Grijalva (AZ), Norton (DC), Levin, Andy (MI), Tlaib (MI)

Ending Forever Wars

Speaking of the Forever Wars, there are several important amendments up for a vote that would help restrain any future President from abusing old congressional authorizations to try to justify sending US troops into battle without the vote demanded by our Constitution.

These “Authorizations for the Use of Military Force” (AUMFs) fulfill the constitutional function of a declaration of war, but too often they have been written to be overly broad - enabling abuse. While the 2001 AUMF (passed after 9/11 to authorize the fight against the Al Qaeda terrorists who did 9/11’s attacks) has been the one most utilized to justify troop deployments and air strikes all over the globe for more than 20 years at targets that have essentially nothing to do with 9/11, other AUMFs also could be exploited in the same way. Repealing these other AUMFs would help build momentum for repealing the 2001 AUMF, and also limit the options any future president (such as Trump 2.0 or Ron Desantis) would have available to exploit.
Tell your Rep to vote yes on all of these amendments.

383. Lee, Barbara (CA) #170 Repeals the 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq.
Co-sponsors: Meeks (NY), Roy (TX)

384. Bowman (NY) #202 Prohibits U.S. military presence in Syria without Congressional approval within one year of enactment.
Co-sponsors: Khanna (CA), Schakowsky (IL), Bush, Cori (MO), Blumenauer (OR), Jones, Mondaire (NY), DeFazio (OR), Lofgren (CA), Cammack, Kat (FL)

385. Spanberger (VA) #260 Repeals the 1991 Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution.
Co-sponsors: Meijer (MI), Meeks (NY), Roy (TX), Kim, Young (CA)

386. Meijer (MI) #696 Repeals the joint resolution of March 9, 1957, that provided for the use of certain funds to promote peace and stability in the Middle East.
Co-sponsors: Spanberger (VA), Roy (TX)

This last amendment lays ground rules for future AUMFs that might be created, to help avoid the problems that have led to the current Forever Wars. Tell your Rep to vote yes on it as well.

387. Lee, Barbara (CA) #976 Expresses the Sense of Congress that Authorizations for the Use of Military Force (AUMFs) should include a sunset provision. Specifically: (1) the inclusion of a sunset provision or reauthorization requirement in authorizations for use of military force is critical to ensuring Congress’s exercise of its constitutional duty to declare war; and (2) any joint resolution enacted to authorize the introduction of United States forces into hostilities or into situations where there is a serious risk of hostilities should include a sunset provision setting forth a date certain for the termination of the authorization for the use of such forces absent the enactment of a subsequent specific statutory authorization for such use of the United States forces.
Co-sponsors: Meijer (MI), Roy (TX)

Climate Change

In 2019, a report found the US military to be “one of the largest climate polluters in history, consuming more liquid fuels and emitting more CO2e (carbon-dioxide equivalent) than most countries”. It established that if the US military were a nation state, it would be the 47th largest emitter of greenhouse gases (GHG) in the world. These figures were from taking into account the emissions from fuel usage alone.

To be clear, the most effective way the U.S. military can reduce its massive contribution to putting all of us in danger is to become smaller, a lot smaller. There is no way to “greenwash” the U.S. military’s large size, global network of bases, & massive commitments that are not necessary for defending America (an unconquerable country protected by two oceans and bordered by smaller, friendly neighbors).

And yet, there is a great deal we can and should do to accomplish harm-reduction, or build momentum and public awareness of the damage to enable future organizing.

This first amendment would increase the extent to which the military and our allies are forced to openly talk about and factor into their planning the escalating devastation they are a major factor in causing. Can’t hurt. Vote yes.

40. Sánchez (CA) #862 Directs the Permanent Representative to NATO to advocate for adequate resources towards understanding and communicating the threat posed by climate change to allied civil security, support the establishment of a NATO Centre of Excellence for Climate and Security, advocate for an in-depth critical assessment of NATO’s vulnerability to the impacts of climate change, and communicate the core security challenge posed by climate change as articulated in NATO’s strategic concept.

This next amendment forces the Pentagon to track and seek to reduce “scope 3 emissions,” which are the greenhouse gas emissions caused by the network of suppliers, contractors, and corporations the DoD uses. Again, can’t hurt. Vote yes.

45. Horsford (NV) #89 Requires the Secretary of Defense to implement a program to track and reduce Scope 3 emissions and energy costs.

Rep Phillips amendment isn’t huge, but making data and information accessible to journalists and activists makes it easier to pressure the Pentagon later. Vote yes.

46. Phillips (MN) #313 Requires the Secretary of Defense to make available on an appropriate website a public facing dashboard displaying actions and reports on adaptation and mitigation investments it would help.

These three amendments could actually have a lot of side-benefits by piggy-backing on the military to help spur the electric vehicle industry by creating more charging infrastructure in more places, and by having the DoD use EVs itself wherever possible. Every little bit helps. Vote yes on all three.

56. Castor (FL) #780 Requires that facility construction plans for parking provide electric vehicle charging capability for at least 15% of motor vehicles to be parked at the facility.
Co-sponsors: Escobar (TX)

57. Gomez (CA) #1040 Expresses a sense of Congress that the Department of Defense should select electric or zero-emission models when purchasing new, non-combat vehicles.

98. Blumenauer (OR) #455 Requires the Defense Logistics Agency to conduct an electrification pilot program.

Cori Bush’s amendment here is helpful in broadening the scope of renewable energy technologies that bases might experiment with. Let a million flowers bloom. Vote yes.

116. Bush, Cori (MO) #1044 Includes wave and tidal power as covered technologies for prototype and demonstration projects for energy resilience at certain military installations.
Co-sponsors: Newman (IL), Barragán (CA)

Both of these amendments create more climate change-focused staff in the U.S. government, and integrates them more directly into the nervous system of foreign policymaking. That’s a good thing. Vote yes.

391. Keating (MA) #84 Requires the State Department to establish and staff Climate Change Officer positions to be posted at U.S. embassies, consulates, or diplomatic missions to provide climate change mitigation expertise, engage with international entities on climate change, and facilitate bilateral and multilateral cooperation on climate change, taking specific actions to develop a strategy to improve and increase the study of, mitigation of, and adaptation to climate change and certify that considerations related to the climate are incorporated at U.S. embassies or other diplomatic posts, while also establishing a curriculum at the Foreign Service Institute to provide employees with specialized climate change training.

392. Jayapal (WA) #306 Establishes an Office of Climate Resilience.

Biomass is energy produced from burning organic matter (typically sawdust & lumber refuse, agricultural waste from crops or livestock, etc) and using the heat to generate steam to turn turbines. While it’s better than coal, you’re still burning stuff, which produces greenhouse gas emissions. It’s renewable in the sense that you can go plant new trees or new crops that will pull the carbon back out of the atmosphere.

In 2014, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) found that “carbon neutrality cannot be assumed for all biomass energy a priori.” Whether or not biomass is truly carbon neutral depends on the time frame being studied, what type of biomass is used, the combustion technology, which fossil fuel is being replaced (since the combustion of both fossil fuels and biomass produces carbon dioxide), and what forest management techniques are employed in the areas where the biomass is harvested.

It makes sense that Rep Garamendi, who represents a large semi-rural district in California that contains lots of agriculture, would propose elevating biomass. While it’s not the most critical thing in the world, I’d probably recommend voting no on this one, to ensure that biomass doesn’t take away oxygen from better renewable sources, but a reasonable person could argue both ways.

397. Garamendi (CA) #41 Clarifies the Department of Defense definition of biomass and biogas so that it aligns with the Clean Air Act, and requires that it be considered a renewable energy source.

Lastly, this amendment would allow for more offshore wind power to be built. That’s a good thing. Vote yes.

398. Ross (NC) #933 Restores the Department of Interior's authority to hold offshore wind lease sales in federal waters off the coasts of North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and Florida, while leaving the leasing moratorium in place in the Eastern Gulf of Mexico at the request of the Department of Defense.
Co-sponsors: Tonko (NY), Rouzer (NC)

Demilitarizing the Police

Ever wonder how your local police department got a gigantic armored vehicle, and are suddenly kitted out like SEAL Team 6 with everything from grenade launchers to military-style assault rifles? The notorious 1033 program is a big reason why. It grants surplus military gear, weapons, and vehicles to police departments, for free.

The very weapons and gear that police around the country used to assault peaceful protestors over the past few years were often part of the $7.5 billion dollars worth of military supplies granted to them through the 1033 program. And the program has had so little oversight and accountability that a 2017 sting by the Government Accountability Office managed to get $1.2 million dollars worth of gear, including assault rifles, delivered to a fake police department.

Hank Johnson’s amendment is an annual attempt to incrementally rein in the 1033 program, and deserves your Rep’s support.

5. Johnson, Hank (GA) #361 Revises the DOD's "1033 program," by prohibiting the transfer of military-grade weapons and tactical vehicles and aircraft to federal, tribal, state, and local law enforcement agencies across the nation, except under certain exceptions when the Secretary determines a waiver is necessary (such as for disaster or rescue purposes or for another purpose where life and public safety are at risk). Still allows law enforcement agencies to obtain the vast majority of the equipment available for distribution under this program while subjecting the more lethal equipment to more oversight by civilian local authorities and the taxpayers.
Co-sponsors: Escobar (TX), Watson Coleman (NJ), McClintock (CA), Cohen (TN), Schakowsky (IL), Moore (WI), Carson (IN), Norton (DC), Blumenauer (OR), Tlaib (MI), Jacobs, Sara (CA), Jones, Mondaire (NY), Gallego (AZ), Jayapal (WA), Gomez (CA) prohibiting

Similarly, Rep Escobar’s amendment helps build momentum for further pressure by requiring more transparency into federal grants to state and local law enforcement. Vote yes.

6. Escobar (TX) #33 Establishes and maintains a publicly available website that provides up-to-date and comprehensive information, in a searchable format, on the purchase of equipment under the 1122 DoD program.

Stay tuned for part 2

This email is getting long, so I’m going to break it into two parts. Stay tuned for amendments about everything from cannabis and ending the failed “war on drugs,” to how the NDAA could advance labor rights for workers, and what it would take to protect democracy from a military coup…

And don’t forget to share this post!

And if you’re a new reader, please subscribe!

-Alexander McCoy