The House passed its version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) yesterday afternoon by a vote of 322-96. The bill authorizes $690 billion worth of spending, and includes several good government and open government government measures.
One amendment, offered by Representative Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), would clarify the Pentagon’s ability to withhold information specifically related to information defined as “defense critical security infrastructure information” by creating a “balancing test,” where the public’s right to know would be weighed against the public interest in withholding.
Another measure brought by Rep. John Carter (R-TX) expands whistleblower protections for Armed Services members.
But building on an issue we raised the other day regarding defense spending earmarks, Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) sent a letter to House Republicans criticizing them for failing to honor their promises to oppose earmarks and for using “non-transparent amendments” that circumvent the usual earmarking process. Neither the public nor Members of the House Armed Services Committee understood the amendments being adopted, she wrote:
“It is my understanding that the new process you instituted, as described by the Chairman’s office and in recent press accounts, was designed to allow members of your committee to submit requests for increases in defense spending accounts ahead of this year’s NDAA markup, much as they sought increases ahead of the consideration of bills in the traditional earmarking process.
“It is further my understanding that your staff subsequently provided some unknown level of vetting of these requests and turned some of them, also for reasons we do not know, into amendments that could be taken up during your markup of this year’s NDAA. At the markup, these amendments were generally taken up in a large group and quickly approved by voice vote with no discussion, debate or justification. In fact, members of your own committee have stated publicly that they were voting on amendments without being fully apprised of their contents.”
To be fair, both parties have engaged in their fair share of earmarking and wasteful spending, especially when it comes to defense spending bills. And earmarks make up a relatively small part of the annual budget. But the senator’s letter does touch on a significantly larger problem: the total lack of discipline when it comes to Congress and the Pentagon’s purse strings.
