Top Dem says Congress should ‘abandon’ $895B defense bill over transgender treatment ban for kids

Rep. Adam Smith, the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, has called for Congress to scrap the latest version of the annual defense policy bill over a controversial provision that bans most transgender medical care for minors. The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for fiscal year 2025 was released over the weekend, and Smith expressed his concerns about the inclusion of a measure that prohibits medical treatment for military dependents under the age of 18 who are diagnosed with gender dysphoria.

In a statement on Sunday night, Smith criticized the provision, stating that denying health care to individuals in need solely based on biased notions against transgender people is unjust. He emphasized that the NDAA should prioritize investments in service members and their families, science and technology, modernization, and a commitment to allies and partners. However, he believes that the inclusion of the provision targeting transgender minors injects a level of partisanship that is not typically seen in defense bills.

The 1,800-page, $895.2 billion legislation is the result of bipartisan negotiations between the House and Senate and outlines U.S. national security and defense priorities for the fiscal year. The controversial measure in question states that medical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria that could result in sterilization may not be provided to a child under the age of 18, specifically referring to transgender children of U.S. service members.

Smith accused Speaker of the House Mike Johnson of pandering to the most extreme elements of his party to ensure his speakership by including the provision in the NDAA. He urged Johnson to abandon the current effort and allow the House to bring forward a bill that supports troops and their families, invests in innovation and modernization, and does not attack the transgender community.

In response, Johnson’s office pointed to the speaker’s initial statement praising the compromise NDAA, which includes provisions to restore military lethality and end what he calls radical woke ideology in the military. The NDAA typically garners wide bipartisan approval but faces opposition from progressives and conservatives critical of the military industrial base and U.S. interventionism.

The legislation faces its first test before the House Rules Committee on Monday afternoon, where its passage may be in question due to hesitance from lawmakers like Smith. If it fails to pass in committee, House leaders may need to send it to the House floor under suspension of the rules, which would require a two-thirds majority for passage.

Overall, the debate surrounding the NDAA underscores the complex and contentious nature of defense policy in Congress. It remains to be seen how lawmakers will navigate these issues and ultimately pass a bill that addresses the diverse needs and priorities of the U.S. military and its service members.