Trump’s latest veto threat over defense bill takes aim at Republican ally

WASHINGTON — U.S. President Donald Trump doubled down on his threat to veto the annual defense policy bill with a pair of late-night tweets that called out the Republican Senate Armed Services Committee chairman — a close ally of the president — for not heeding to his demands for changes to the measure.

It’s the latest act in the drama over the bill, which defies Trump’s plans to retain the titles of several Army bases named after Confederate figures and withdraw troops from Afghanistan and Germany.

If the legislation doesn’t become law, it will mark the end of a streak of 59 consecutive years of success for the defense budget policy measure, and throw into disarray hundreds of planned Pentagon reforms, program starts and specialty pay reauthorizations .

Republican and Democratic aides to the armed services committees that draft the bill each year said before the president’s latest tweets that they did not have a backup plan if the commander in chief vetoes the legislation.

“We’re definitely not looking at what to do about a veto,” said a senior Republican aide to the Senate Armed Services Committee, “because we’re still hoping there won’t be a veto.”

The 4,517-page, $740.5 billion defense authorization bill for fiscal 2021 unveiled Thursday is the product of months of negotiations between House, Senate and Trump administration officials. Congressional aides said they expect the bill to pass the House early next week, with the Senate following a day or two later.

Trump in recent months has said he would veto the bill over its inclusion of language to rename military bases named for Confederate figures. But multiple times in recent days, he has said lawmakers should include a provision to repeal Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act in the measure — otherwise he would block the legislation.

Trump, in a running war with big-tech companies like Facebook and Twitter, has accused the social media sites of censoring conservative views, including his own.

Earlier in the week, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., reportedly told Trump that Congress will move forward without his new demand. On Friday, Trump sent two tweets shortly after midnight attacking the decision.

“Very sadly for our Nation, it looks like Senator @JimInhofe will not be putting the Section 230 termination clause into the Defense Bill,” he wrote. “So bad for our National Security and Election Integrity. Last chance to ever get it done. I will VETO!”

Inhofe had already released a statement proudly announcing the completion of the bill, which “champions our troops, supports our military families, and strengthens our national defense.” Trump retweeted that and added: “But doesn’t get rid of Big Tech’s windfall, Section 230, a grave threat to National Security. I will VETO!”

In an apparent conciliatory move Wednesday, Inhofe — an arch conservative and one of the most senior Republicans negotiating the bill — used a Senate floor speech to pledge “to do everything possible” to get a repeal, but “through other means.”

A repeal of Section 230 has no established consensus in Congress, and Inhofe argued the inclusion of repeal language would tank the NDAA.

“We need a place for repealing Section 230, and we need to do it. The NDAA is about making sure our troops are cared for,” Inhofe said. “It’s for our kids in the field. They’re the ones that we are supporting. They are the ones that need us.”

It’s unclear what personal political damage there is for Inhofe, whose successful reelection bid Trump endorsed this year. Inhofe defeated his Democratic opponent by more than 30 points in the November election, and is expected to return as chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee again next year.

Democrats have insisted that vetoing the popular defense bill would be a political mistake for Trump and the Republican Party ahead of crucial Senate runoff elections in Georgia next month. House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith, D-Wash., has predicted Republicans would vote to override in the event of a veto, but it’s undoubtedly a logistical headache for Congress.

“If the president is foolish enough to veto it, I think they’ve staked out their ground very clearly,” Smith said of congressional Republicans earlier this week. “They’re not going to vote for [earlier versions] going out [of the House and Senate] and then change because it’s an override.”

Several Republicans, including Senate Majority Whip John Thune, R-S.D., have objected to Trump’s veto threat, but they’ll likely be weighing whether they want to defy a president who is willing to call out Republicans by name in his Twitter feed.

A presidential veto also brings with it problematic timing issues for Congress. Both the House and Senate are scheduled to begin holiday recess at the end of next week, and the current congressional session ends Jan 3.

Enrolling the massive defense policy bill and sending it to the White House typically takes a week or more. Trump will have 10 days to decide whether to issue the veto. That timeline could leave congressional leaders scrambling to schedule a vote for overriding the veto as well as fly members back to Capitol Hill just days or hours before the new session of Congress is seated.

In fall 2019, when NDAA talks were deadlocked between the chambers and the White House, Inhofe suggested a bare-bones version of the annual legislation to authorize only the special pays and benefits for troops that would otherwise lapse.

But in a conference call with reporters Thursday to detail this year’s compromise bill, committee aides said there is no such plan this year.

“This is the bill,” said a senior Democratic aide to the House Armed Services Committee. “This is the bill that’s going to pass the House ... and the president will do what the president’s going to do. The leadership of the House and Senate will decide how they’re going to react, should the president do something other than sign the bill into law.”

Lawmakers have said the bill cannot be recycled in the new Congress without significant new work.

“If the president decides to veto it, we will deal with it with the time we have,” the Democratic aide said. “And if we don’t, we’ll figure out how we’re going to manage a problem like that.”

Joe Gould was the senior Pentagon reporter for Defense News, covering the intersection of national security policy, politics and the defense industry. He had previously served as Congress reporter.

Leo covers Congress, Veterans Affairs and the White House for Military Times. He has covered Washington, D.C. since 2004, focusing on military personnel and veterans policies. His work has earned numerous honors, including a 2009 Polk award, a 2010 National Headliner Award, the IAVA Leadership in Journalism award and the VFW News Media award.

华盛顿——美国总统唐纳德·特朗普在深夜连发两条推文，再次威胁要否决年度国防政策法案。他在推文中指责共和党参议院军事委员会主席（总统的亲密盟友）没有理会他提出的修改法案的要求。

这是围绕该法案的最新进展，该法案违背了特朗普保留以南方邦联人物命名的几个陆军基地的名称以及从阿富汗和德国撤军的计划。

如果该法案未能成为法律，将标志着国防预算政策措施连续 59 年取得成功的终结，并使数百项五角大楼改革计划、项目启动和专项工资重新授权陷入混乱。

每年负责起草法案的军事委员会的共和党和民主党助手在总统发布最新推文之前表示，如果三军统帅否决该法案，他们没有备用方案。

“我们绝对没有考虑如何应对否决，”参议院军事委员会的一位共和党高级助手说，“因为我们仍然希望不会出现否决。”

周四公布的这份长达4517页、总额达7405亿美元的2021财年国防授权法案，是众议院、参议院和特朗普政府官员数月谈判的成果。国会助理表示，他们预计该法案将于下周初在众议院获得通过，参议院将在未来一两天内跟进。

近几个月来，特朗普曾多次表示，他将否决这项法案，因为其中包含一项条款，要求重新命名以南方邦联人物命名的军事基地。但最近几天，他又多次表示，立法者应该在法案中加入一项条款，废除1996年《通信规范法》第230条——否则他将阻止该法案通过。

特朗普与 Facebook 和 Twitter 等大型科技公司之间一直存在着激烈的争论，他指责这些社交媒体网站审查保守派观点，包括他自己的观点。

本周早些时候，据报道，参议院军事委员会主席、俄克拉荷马州共和党参议员吉姆·英霍夫告诉特朗普，国会将不会采纳他的新要求。周五凌晨刚过，特朗普就发布了两条推文，抨击了这一决定。

“非常遗憾的是，参议员吉姆·英霍夫似乎不会将第230条终止条款纳入国防法案，”他写道。“这对我们的国家安全和选举公正来说太糟糕了。这是最后一次机会了。我将否决这项法案！”

英霍夫此前已发表声明，自豪地宣布法案完成，称其“捍卫我们的军队，支持我们的军属，并加强我们的国防”。特朗普转发了该声明，并补充道：“但该法案并未废除大型科技公司获得的意外之财——第230条，这对国家安全构成严重威胁。我将否决该法案！”

周三，英霍夫（Inhofe）——一位立场强硬的保守派人士，也是参与该法案谈判的资深共和党人之一——在参议院发表讲话，承诺“尽一切可能”废除该法案，但“通过其他手段”。

国会尚未就废除第 230 条款达成共识，英霍夫认为，加入废除条款将导致《国防授权法案》失败。

“我们需要找到废除第230条的途径，而且我们必须这样做。《国防授权法案》旨在确保我们的军队得到照顾，”英霍夫说。“这是为了那些在前线作战的士兵。他们才是我们支持的对象。他们才是真正需要我们的人。”

目前尚不清楚此次事件对英霍夫的个人政治影响有多大，他今年曾获得特朗普的支持，成功连任。英霍夫在11月的选举中以超过30个百分点的优势击败了民主党对手，预计明年将继续担任参议院军事委员会主席。

民主党人坚称，在下个月佐治亚州即将举行关键的参议院决选之际，否决这项广受欢迎的国防法案对特朗普和共和党来说将是一个政治错误。众议院军事委员会主席、华盛顿州民主党众议员亚当·史密斯预测，如果总统否决该法案，共和党人将会投票推翻否决，但这无疑会给国会带来后勤方面的难题。

“如果总统愚蠢到否决这项法案，我认为国会共和党人已经非常明确地表明了他们的立场，”史密斯本周早些时候谈到国会共和党人时说。“他们不会先投票支持（众议院和参议院的）早期版本，然后再因为可以推翻否决权而修改它。”

包括参议院多数党党鞭约翰·图恩在内的几位共和党人反对特朗普的否决威胁，但他们可能会权衡是否要违抗一位愿意在推特上点名批评共和党人的总统。

总统否决权还会给国会带来棘手的时事问题。众议院和参议院都计划在下周末开始休会，而本届国会会期将于1月3日结束。

通常情况下，将庞大的国防政策法案提交白宫需要一周或更长时间。特朗普将有十天时间决定是否行使否决权。如此紧迫的时间安排可能会让国会领导人疲于奔命，他们不仅要赶在国会新会期开始前几天甚至几小时内安排议员们返回国会山，还要紧急安排推翻否决权的投票。

2019 年秋季，当参众两院和白宫之间的国防授权法案谈判陷入僵局时，英霍夫建议制定一个年度立法的精简版本，仅授权向军队发放原本会失效的特殊津贴和福利。

但在周四与记者举行的电话会议上，委员会助手们详细介绍了今年的妥协法案，并表示今年没有这样的计划。

“这就是法案，”众议院军事委员会一位资深民主党助手说。“这就是将在众议院获得通过的法案……至于总统会怎么做，就由总统来决定。如果总统最终没有签署法案使其生效，众议院和参议院的领导层将决定他们该如何应对。”

议员们表示，如果不进行大量新的修改，该法案无法在新一届国会中重新审议。

“如果总统决定否决这项法案，我们会利用现有时间处理，”这位民主党助手说。“如果我们不否决，我们会想办法应对这类问题。”

乔·古尔德是《防务新闻》的资深五角大楼记者，负责报道国家安全政策、政治和国防工业的交汇点。他此前曾担任国会记者。

利奥为《军事时报》报道国会、退伍军人事务部和白宫的新闻。自2004年以来，他一直报道华盛顿特区的新闻，重点关注军人和退伍军人政策。他的作品荣获多项荣誉，包括2009年波尔克奖、2010年国家头条新闻奖、国际退伍军人协会新闻领导力奖和美国退伍军人协会新闻媒体奖。