House poised to vote on hundreds of amendments to defense bill

When the House debates its defense authorization bill starting Tuesday night, it plans to consider 476 amendments on everything from the proper level of U.S. defense spending to how best to handle the Afghanistan war’s fallout.

The House will consider, and probably reject, proposals to cut the amount of spending authorized in the bill.

But other votes, in some cases closer ones, will take place on amendments to streamline the processing of Afghan refugees, to tighten restrictions on top Pentagon officials who become lobbyists and to impose U.S. government sanctions on those who harm or kill journalists.

The list of amendments appears to be shorn of most if not all GOP proposals that had been filed with the Rules Committee to try to overturn federal vaccine mandates, to block diversity training in the military and to remove a provision in the bill requiring women to sign up with the Selective Service for a potential future military draft.

But there are still plenty of other issues for the House to wade through.

Democrat Barbara Lee of California has an amendment that would reduce the amount of defense spending the bill would authorize in fiscal 2022 to the level proposed by President Joe Biden — a reduction of about $25 billion.

As it now stands, the authorization bill and other House authorization measures would endorse about $778 billion for defense programs in the Pentagon and other departments and agencies — money that must still be appropriated in separate legislation. The Senate is poised to authorize the same amount.

Likewise, an amendment from Mark Pocan, D-Wis., would reduce the overall authorization level by 10 percent, excluding personnel and health care accounts.

Similar amendments have failed in the recent past, and there is no sign that the balance of power on this issue has shifted.

Another category of amendments of potential interest to top officials in the Pentagon and defense industry affects lobbying by former top Defense Department officials.

One such proposal, by California Democrat Jackie Speier and others, would extend — from one year to two years — the so-called cooling-off period for former senior executive branch officials before they can lobby their previous agency.

Another amendment by Speier and others would require defense contractors to formally represent to the Pentagon that their employees comply with rules restricting lobbying by former officials.