H.R. 8070 - YES: We voted to pass the FY’25 National Defense Authorization Act,, which provides vital funding and policy directives that modernize the U.S. military's capabilities while enhancing quality of life provisions for service members and their families. You can read our full statement on the passage of this year's NDAA here.
H.Res. 1292 - YES: We voted to find Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress for failing to comply with a subpoena related to Special Counsel Robert Hur's interviews. This vote holds the Attorney General accountable for non-compliance and seeks to ensure transparency and accurate documentation of these interviews.
There were hundreds of amendments proposed for the FY '25 NDAA. Listed below are the ones we supported, which passed along with the NDAA:
Amendment 8 (Rep. Mast) - YES: We voted in favor of prohibiting the use of Department of Defense funds to transport Palestinian refugees to the United States. We made this vote because American’s security matter the most. If we transport unknown individuals without proper background checks, we pose potential security risks to American citizens. This amendment passed.
Amendment 24 (Rep. Roy) - YES: We absolutely supported this amendment, which prevents the use of funds from the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) to implement President Biden's executive orders on climate change that mandate achieving net-zero emissions by 2050. Our vote ensures that the U.S. military is not sacrificing its readiness to prioritize a radical and unrealistic climate agenda. Further, our vote will allow the DoD to adopt beneficial aspects of these orders without being bound by the specific net-zero mandate. This amendment passed.
Amendment 35 (Rep. Waltz) - YES: We voted in favor of this amendment, which stops the enforcement of regulations that have limited the 1033 Program, which transfers excess military equipment to local law enforcement agencies. Our support for this measure aims to uphold local law enforcement's access to necessary equipment by overriding restrictive executive orders. This amendment passed.
H.Res. 1292 - YES: We voted to find Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress for failing to comply with a subpoena related to Special Counsel Robert Hur's interviews. This vote holds the Attorney General accountable for non-compliance and seeks to ensure transparency and accurate documentation of these interviews.
Amendment 52 (Rep. Rosendale) - YES: We supported this amendment, which stops TRICARE, the military's health care program, from covering gender transition surgeries and hormone treatments. Additionally, it prevents the Department of Defense from providing these procedures. Our vote advocates for focusing military medical resources on combat readiness and core health services rather than on medical procedures unrelated to the military's primary mission.
Amendment 55 (Rep. Van Duyne) - YES: Our vote prohibits the Department of Defense from funding or reimbursing expenses related to abortion procedures. This decision aligns with existing federal laws that restrict the use of funds for abortion services, maintaining adherence to these laws and limiting the DoD’s expenditures on abortion-related travel and leave. This will still fund abortion procedures in the event of rape or incest.
Amendment 41 (Rep. Grothman) - YES: Our vote supports a permanent hiring freeze on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) positions within the Department of Defense. This reflects our stance on maintaining a merit-based system in the military and reducing bureaucracy and expenditures related to DEI initiatives.
Amendment 42 (Rep. Norman) - YES: We voted in favor of this amendment, which eliminates DEI offices and personnel across the Armed Forces and the Department of Defense. Our support for this measure aims to refocus resources and priorities on core military readiness capabilities rather than wasteful diversity, equity, and inclusion programs.
Amendment 43 (Rep. Higgins) - YES: Our vote removes the position of Chief Diversity Officer within the Department of Defense organizational structure. This decision supports streamlining operations by eliminating roles and associated costs that are not directly essential to the Department's primary defense mission.
Amendment 45 (Rep. Williams) - YES: We voted to prohibit the Department of Defense from using funds to contract with or support entities that provide ratings or assessments of the credibility of news and information outlets. Our support for this amendment ensures that DoD advertising placements and information campaigns are not unduly influenced by external subjective ratings.
Amendment 46 (Rep. Steube) - YES: Our vote bans the Department of Defense Education Activity, which oversees schools for military children, from utilizing or providing instructional materials that promote radical gender ideology theories or include pornographic content. This amendment protects children attending DoD schools from exposure to inappropriate and controversial content.
Amendment 48 (Rep. Boebert) - YES: We voted to cut funding for the Countering Extremist Activity Working Group, which has been criticized for primarily targeting right-wing extremism within the ranks of the military. Our support for this amendment addresses concerns over potential biases and uneven enforcement against conservative servicemembers.
Amendment 49 (Rep. Mills) - YES: Our vote restricts military leadership from approving or allowing the display of flags not officially recognized by the Department of Defense on military installations. This promotes a uniform policy and avoids the presence of divisive symbols that could undermine unit cohesion.
Amendment 53 (Rep. Norman) - YES: Our vote prevents the Exceptional Family Medical Program, which provides medical services to family members of military personnel, from offering or covering gender transition procedures. This focuses the program on providing more traditional medical services by excluding gender-related treatments.
Amendment 228 (Rep. James) - YES: Our vote calls for a comprehensive review and re-evaluation of the United States' bilateral relationship with South Africa in light of concerns about shifts in South Africa's recent international alignments and geopolitical stances, which may impact mutual interests of freedom and democracy.
|