skip to main content

H.R. 4909: National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017

May 18, 2016 at 10:06 p.m. ET. On Passage of the Bill in the House.

This was a vote to pass H.R. 4909 (114th) in the House. The federal budget process occurs in two stages: appropriations and authorizations. This is an authorization bill, which directs how federal funds should or should not be used. (It does not set overall spending limits, however, which are the subject of appropriations bills.) Authorizations are typically made for single fiscal years (October 1 through September 30 of the next year) but are often renewed in subsequent law.

The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) is an annual federal spending bill that sets funding levels and outlines spending priorities for the military. Defense spending constituted $602 billion or 16 percent of the federal budget last year, and 54 percent of so-called “discretionary spending” over which Congress exercises yearly control. This makes the NDAA one of the most important bills on Congress’s agenda — so vital that despite partisan gridlock, the measure has passed Congress and been signed by the president for 54 consecutive years.

What’s in this year’s measure? And will it pass or break the 54-year streak?

What the bill does

The House bill, H.R. 4909, would set defense funding at $610 billion, up slightly from last year’s amount, while the Senate bill, S. 2943, funds $602 billion.

The bill has, literally, thousands of substantive policy provisions. We've found some of the most salient:

The bill would uphold the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF) which was passed in the wake of the terrorist attacks, although some critics say that the authorization is outdated and doesn’t take into account newer threats such as the Islamic State. It would also ensure that detainees currently held at the Guantanamo Bay detention center in Cuba, which President Obama has sought to close to transfer the remaining detainees to the U.S., could not in fact be transferred to the mainland, at least not this year.

The provision that had attracted the most attention was one that wouldrequire women to register for the Selective Service, as all male citizens are currently required to do at age 18. Although the House Armed Service Committee had approved the language, which was based on the Draft America’s Daughters Act, the provision was removed in a procedural votebringing the bill to the House floor.

One of the most controversial provisions would remove protections for LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) employees of military contractors, after a President Obama executive order granted such protections last year. A subsequent vote to roll back the provision in the House bill (that is, a vote to restore protections) was so heated that House Democrats started chants of “Shame!” on the floor when the vote on the LGBT worker protections was voted down by one vote, thanks to seven Republicans switching their votes on the House floor.

What supporters say

Supporters say the bill is strong on defense in a dangerous world of terrorist threats, and makes needed changes to everything from equipment to health care.

“This is a reform bill. The NDAA contains the most sweeping reforms of the organization of the Department of Defense in a generation. It modernizes the military health system to provide beneficiaries with higher quality care, better access to care, and a better experience of care,” said Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John McCain (R-AZ). “The NDAA is also an innovation bill. It refocuses Pentagon leadership on preserving America’s military technological advantage and advances reforms to the defense acquisition system to harness American innovation.”

“We need to build a 21st century military capable of confronting the evolving threats we face. However, gaping equipment and funding shortfalls are endangering our troops and making it harder for them to execute their missions,” Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R-WI1) Paul Ryan said. “The NDAA will help close this readiness gap by modernizing and fully funding our forces.”

What opponents say

House Democrats voted 40–142 against the bill, a strong opposition given the traditionally bipartisan nature of the legislation. Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA9), the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, called the aforementioned LGBT vote “the last straw” in his decision to oppose the bill.

The White House has indicated a financial provision as their main source of opposition.

“The bill would redirect $18 billion of Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) funds,” the slush-fund for Middle East military operations, “toward base budget programs that the Department of Defense (DOD) did not request, cutting off critical funding for wartime operations after April 30, 2017. Not only is this approach dangerous, but it is also wasteful,” the White House said in a statement. “By gambling with warfighting funds, the bill risks the safety of our men and women fighting to keep America safe, undercuts stable planning and efficient use of taxpayer dollars, dispirits troops and their families, baffles our allies, and emboldens our enemies.”

Odds of passage

More than half a century of success in passing the NDAA is no guarantee for this time around. The House passed this year’s NDAA earlier this month 277–147 but that falls short of the 290 votes needed to override a presidential veto. The White House has issued a veto threat for the current iteration being negotiated in Congress, with the primary criticism being the usage of funds marked for war expenses for routine spending instead.

This is no idle threat. Last October, President Obama vetoed the NDAA that originally passed Congress, only the fifth veto of his presidency. Obama’s main issue was an extra $38 billion that Republicans had included as “temporary extra” military spending, which Obama and many Democrats considered an unpaid-for workaround to agreed-upon budget caps. A month later, a revised plan was passed and signed by the president. It featured provisions including an adjustment to the veterans’ retirement plans, preventing a planned round of military base closings, and making the process of adopting military dogs or other animals easier.

The Senate Armed Services Committee passed the current Senate bill 23–3 last week. The full Senate will vote on it soon. The two chambers will then need to strike an agreement to combine their versions.


All Votes R D
Aye 65%
No 35%
Not Voting

Passed. Simple Majority Required. Source:

Ideology Vote Chart

Republican - Aye Democrat - Aye Republican - No Democrat - No
Seat position based on our ideology score.

Cartogram Map

Each hexagon represents one congressional district. Solid hexes are Aye votes.

What you can do

Vote Details

Notes: The Speaker’s Vote? “Aye” or “Yea”?
Download as CSV

Statistically Notable Votes

Statistically notable votes are the votes that are most surprising, or least predictable, given how other members of each voter’s party voted and other factors.

All Votes

Study Guide

How well do you understand this vote? Use this study guide to find out.

You can find answers to most of the questions below here on the vote page. For a guide to understanding the bill this vote was about, see here.

What was the procedure for this vote?

  1. What was this vote on?
  2. Not all votes are meant to pass legislation. In the Senate some votes are not about legislation at all, since the Senate must vote to confirm presidential nominations to certain federal positions.

    This vote is related to a bill. However, that doesn’t necessarily tell you what it is about. Congress makes many decisions in the process of passing legislation, such as on the procedures for debating the bill, whether to change the bill before voting on passage, and even whether to vote on passage at all.

    You can learn more about the various motions used in Congress at If you aren’t sure what the House was voting on, try seeing if it’s on this list.

  3. What is the next step after this vote?
  4. Take a look at where this bill is in the legislative process. What might come next? Keep in mind what this specific vote was on, and the context of the bill. Will there be amendments? Will the other chamber of Congress vote on it, or let it die?

    For this question it may help to briefly examine the bill itself.

What is your analysis of this vote?

  1. What trends do you see in this vote?
  2. Members of Congress side together for many reasons beside being in the same political party, especially so for less prominent legislation or legislation specific to a certain region. What might have determined how the roll call came out in this case? Does it look like Members of Congress voted based on party, geography, or some other reason?

    One tool that will be helpful in answering this question is the cartogram at the top of the page. A cartogram is a stylized map of the United States that shows each district as an identical hexagon. This view allows you to see the how the representatives from each district voted arranged by their geography and colored by their political party. What trends can you see in the cartogram for this vote?

  3. How did your representative vote?
  4. There is one vote here that should be more important to you than all the others. These are the votes cast by your representative, which is meant to represent you and your community. Do you agree with how your representative voted? Why do you think they voted the way they did?

    If you don’t already know who your Members of Congress are you can find them by entering your address here.

Each vote’s study guide is a little different — we automatically choose which questions to include based on the information we have available about the vote. Study guides are a new feature to GovTrack. You can help us improve them by filling out this survey or by sending your feedback to