The House of Representatives, in a tight 215-214 vote, moved to establish a presumption of approval for qualified service members and Pentagon civilian staff seeking permission from commanders to carry personal firearms on military installations. This measure would make approval the default outcome for such requests.
The amendment saw three Democrats align with the majority of Republicans in its favor, while three Republicans and independent Representative Kevin Kiley of California voted against it.
Sponsored by Representative Jeff Crank, a Republican from Colorado, the provision does not grant automatic authorization for individuals to carry firearms on military property. Instead, it creates a baseline expectation that installation commanders will approve requests from eligible military personnel and civilian employees.
This vote takes place less than a year after an incident in August 2025 at Fort Stewart, Georgia, where an Army sergeant allegedly used a personal handgun to injure five fellow soldiers. All five victims survived after other soldiers intervened and disarmed the alleged assailant. At the time of the incident, personal firearms were prohibited on the post, according to military officials.
Divisive Amendments Shape Defense Bill Debate
The annual National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which has been enacted into law for over six decades and is typically a bipartisan legislative effort, saw several amendments adopted on Tuesday that could jeopardize Democratic support. These provisions, particularly those concerning firearms and transgender policy, might compel Republican leadership to rely solely on their narrow majority for final passage and could create significant obstacles in future negotiations with the Senate.
Lawmakers also passed an amendment introduced by Representative Nancy Mace, a Republican from South Carolina, which would prevent TRICARE from covering hormones for gender transition, puberty blockers, and related surgeries for service members and their dependents.
This provision passed with a vote of 219-208, with five Democrats supporting it and one Republican opposing. It aims to expand existing restrictions from the Trump administration and codify this prohibition into federal law.
Additionally, the House approved a second amendment from Representative Mace by a margin of 221-203. This measure would prohibit transgender girls from participating in girls' sports within Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) schools, which serve military families.
However, a separate amendment proposed by Representative Lauren Boebert, a Republican from Colorado, failed to pass. This amendment sought to codify former President Donald Trump's 2025 executive order, which barred transgender individuals from military service and mandated that personnel serve according to their biological sex.
The Boebert amendment was defeated 217-212, with four Republicans joining all voting Democrats in opposition.
Broader Policy and Funding Decisions
Lawmakers also rejected an attempt by Representative Eli Crane, a Republican from Arizona, to substantially cut funding for the Pentagon's Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative. The proposed amendment would have restricted funding to only cover security operations at the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv.
Seventy-six Republicans backed this proposal, underscoring ongoing dissent within the Republican conference regarding military aid for Ukraine.
Another proposal, which would have prohibited foreign nationals from attending U.S. military academies, was overwhelmingly rejected in a 360-61 vote. This amendment would have brought an end to long-standing programs that train officers from allied and partner nations at institutions such as West Point, the Naval Academy, and the Air Force Academy.
Among other amendments, lawmakers voted to eliminate a planned pilot program designed to utilize voice-based risk-assessment technology for identifying service members for drug testing.
The House also narrowly approved, by a 215-214 vote, language aimed at ensuring the continued operation of California’s Santa Ynez Pipeline System, which transports crude oil to refineries supplying military installations.
NDAA's Path and Procedural Complications
These votes occurred as legislators began processing amendments to the fiscal year 2027 National Defense Authorization Act. The House made 320 amendments eligible for consideration, an increase of eight from the procedural package that collapsed last month following a Republican challenge over the SAVE America Act.
Debate on further amendments is slated to resume on Wednesday, with a vote on final passage expected after the remaining proposals are considered.
The core legislation would authorize approximately $1.15 trillion for national defense, representing an increase of about $252 billion compared to the defense programs appropriated in fiscal year 2026. It includes provisions for military pay raises ranging from 5% to 7% for service members, an expansion of weapons and munitions production, and accelerated investment in missile defense, autonomous systems, hypersonics, and other advanced technologies.
While the NDAA establishes defense policy and authorizes spending levels, it does not directly provide funding. Congress must pass separate defense appropriations legislation to finance the programs and priorities outlined in the bill.
A notable provision in the legislation would also formally rename the Department of Defense to the Department of War, stipulating that all references to the defense secretary and department in federal law would thereafter refer to the secretary and Department of War.
Consideration of this legislation was previously delayed for three weeks due to an internal Republican dispute concerning the SAVE America Act. This election-related legislation, championed by former President Trump, mandates documentary proof of citizenship for voter registration and identification for casting ballots in federal elections.
The House approved the SAVE America Act in February with a 218-213 vote, but the measure subsequently stalled in the Senate, where Republicans could not garner the 60 votes required to overcome a filibuster.
Initially, Republican leaders planned to revive the election legislation by instructing the House clerk to merge it with the NDAA after the defense bill passed but before the combined package was transmitted to the Senate. This strategy would have sent both measures as a single bill without formally embedding the SAVE America Act into the NDAA text debated on the floor.
However, the procedural rule authorizing this plan failed on June 30, with a vote of 198-224, as 13 Republican holdouts joined Democrats in opposition. House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, a Republican from Louisiana, also voted against the rule for procedural reasons.
Representative Anna Paulina Luna, a Republican from Florida, contended that attaching the election measure through such a procedural maneuver would make it easier for the Senate to remove. She advocated for its direct inclusion into the NDAA.
Luna later accepted the original approach after Speaker Mike Johnson committed to attaching the SAVE America Act to appropriations and other essential legislation that must pass.
On Tuesday, the House approved a replacement rule that again directed the clerk to merge the election legislation with the NDAA before sending it to the Senate, while also expanding the number of eligible defense amendments from 312 to 320.
Despite these procedural maneuvers, the SAVE America Act is still expected to encounter opposition in the Senate and could be removed during the process of reconciling the House and Senate versions of the defense bill.
Senate Challenges and Future Funding Needs
The Senate's own version of the NDAA has encountered its share of difficulties. Senate Democrats obstructed consideration of their chamber’s defense bill last week in protest of the Trump administration’s war with Iran, leaving both legislative bodies with significant work to complete before they can negotiate a final package.
This legislative debate unfolds as the Pentagon seeks additional financial resources to fund the ongoing Iran war and replenish its weapons stockpiles. The White House has requested an $87.6 billion supplemental package, with $67.1 billion earmarked for defense requirements.
House Republicans are also exploring a new reconciliation package that could allocate $60 billion through the Armed Services Committee and an additional $13 billion for intelligence programs. Utilizing reconciliation would enable the package to bypass a Senate filibuster and pass without Democratic support, but the proposal faces resistance from Republican fiscal conservatives and has an uncertain path through Congress.