Congress is poised to use the annual defense policy bill to eliminate the Pentagon’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate — a major concession from President Biden’s Democratic allies that is helping pave the way for the adoption of the comprehensive package before the end of the year.
In a compromise with Republicans, House Democrats allow language in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that repeals the coronavirus vaccine mandate for US service members a year after it was signed into law, Mike Rogers (R-Ala.) confirmed to The Hill on Tuesday.
The bill, which outlines how an $847 billion Department of Defense top line will be allocated in fiscal year 2023, is tentatively expected to be released as early as Tuesday evening and voted on by the House on Thursday, Rogers said.
Asked if he thought the tongue would stick around amid all the last-minute jostling over the bill, Rogers replied, “Yes.”
Republican lawmakers have for months pushed back against the Pentagon’s mandate for the COVID-19 vaccine, which Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin first installed in August 2021.
Since then, thousands of active duty service members have been fired for refusing fire, according to the latest Pentagon figures.
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), who is vying for the president’s gavel in the upcoming Congress, said Sunday that the NDAA “won’t budge” unless the mandate of the army is lifted by the bill.
The compromise is effectively a loss for the White House and the Pentagon, which have both opposed using the NDAA to repeal the vaccine mandate.
“We’ve lost a million people to this virus,” Austin told reporters traveling with him on Saturday, as reported by The Associated Press. “A million people have died in the United States of America. We’ve lost hundreds to the DOD. This mandate has therefore allowed people to stay healthy.
House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) on Tuesday strongly supported the Pentagon mandate, but also stressed that the art of compromise means no side gets everything it wants. . For Democrats, he said, that could mean they have to give up the mandate to pass the bigger package.
“It’s a question of how to do something,” he told reporters on Capitol Hill. “We have a very close vote in the Senate, a very close vote in the House, and you just don’t get everything you want.”
The Democrats’ concession to a term they once zealously defended underscores how attitudes around vaccines have changed since the coronavirus struck nearly three years ago.
“The policy on that has changed,” said Rep. Marc Veasey (D-Texas), another member of the Armed Forces panel. “If it was 2020, that would be a different story.”
One thing not provided for in the bill, however, is language to reinstate troops, sailors and airmen who have been discharged or received sanctions for refusing the vaccine, a provision that GOP lawmakers hoped to insert into the legislation.
Instead, lawmakers on the House and Senate Armed Services Committees are planning reporting language for the bill that allows the Pentagon to assess service members affected by the warrant, Rogers said.
“There is no statutory language, but there is reporting language that tells the [Defense Department] to verify everyone who has been affected by the vaccine mandate and what it would take to cure them and get it to us next year. Then we can decide if we want to try to do it or not,” he said.
“Some people won’t want to go back to the military, but if they do, what will it be like? How many people are we talking about?
The issue of COVID-19 vaccines was just one of a minefield of contentious topics facing negotiators as they race to pass the defense authorization bill this month.
Another potential policy hurdle, a proposal by Sen. Joe Manchin (DW.Va.) to speed up the energy infrastructure permit approval process, also seems unlikely to make it into the final defense bill if the legislators want to pass it. line.
The White House had promised Manchin a vote on his licensing reforms in exchange for backing a massive tax, health care and climate bill passed earlier in the year. And Democratic leaders in the White House and both chambers lobbied this week to include the provision in the defense bill.
Yet that plan appears to have hit a wall in the form of progressive lawmakers, who are threatening to oppose the rule that would allow the defense bill to hit the ground if energy policies are included.
Given the narrow majority of Democrats and the fact that Republicans almost never vote for the rules proposed by Democrats, even if they support the underlying bill, the maneuver would likely only require a few Democratic defectors to succeed. .
“I don’t think there are the votes to support this,” House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith (D-Wash.) told The Hill. “If it was up to me at this point it wouldn’t be, but it’s not up to me, but it feels like there’s no support for it.”
Smith said, however, the final decision on whether or not to include the provisions rests with House leadership and has yet to be made.
Among the Democrats who have said they would vote against the rule if authorization for the reform is included are Representatives Raúl Grijalva (Arizona), Jesús García (Illinois), Ro Khanna (California) and Jamaal Bowman (NY).
“I think the numbers are there,” Garcia said. “I think our opposition might cause them to reconsider.”
And the list of defectors could grow.
“I don’t want to say outright that I would vote against the rule, but if it’s the Manchin crap sandwich, aggravated to appease Republicans, of course I’m not going to suffocate it,” Rep. Jared Huffman said. (D-California) says.
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), the chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, indicated that she believed the progressive effort would be enough to kill the chances of permissions reform in the NDAA.
“Republicans generally don’t vote for the rule, some of them might, but I can’t imagine there would be enough to counter the number of progressives who have already told me that they vote against the rule,” she said. She added that the caucus is still taking stock of the extent of opposition to the rule.
As barriers fall, top Democrats are already predicting the House will finally pass the package with broad bipartisan support by the end of the week.
“At the end of the day, I don’t think there’s going to be an issue that would prevent the passage of the NDAA,” said Rep. Jim Langevin (DR.I.), a senior member of the Armed Forces panel. “We’ve passed it 60 years in a row, and I think this year will be no exception.”
Updated at 5:53 p.m.
