Advertisement

We need your help now

Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.

You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.

If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.

Andrew Harnik
outgoing president

Donald Trump vetoes annual US defence bill, setting up a Congress vote to override his decision

The bill affirms 3% pay raises for US troops and authorises more than $740 billion in military programmes and construction.

US PRESIDENT DONALD Trump has vetoed the annual defence policy bill, following through on threats to halt a measure that has broad bipartisan support in Congress and potentially setting up the first override vote of his presidency.

The bill affirms 3% pay raises for US troops and authorises more than $740 billion in military programmes and construction.

Long before issuing the veto, Trump offered a series of rationales for rejecting it.

He has called for politicians to include limits on social media companies he claimed are biased against him — and to strip out language that allows for the renaming of military bases such as Fort Benning and Fort Hood that honour Confederate leaders.

Without going into detail, he has claimed the biggest winner from the defence bill would be China.

In his veto message to the House, President Trump cited those objections and stated that the measure “fails to include critical national security measures, includes provisions that fail to respect our veterans and our military’s history, and contradicts efforts by my Administration to put America first in our national security and foreign policy actions. It is a ‘gift’ to China and Russia”.

Both the House and Senate passed the measure by margins large enough to override a veto from the president.

Trump had vetoed eight bills previously, but those vetoes were sustained because supporters did not gain the two-thirds vote needed in each chamber for the bill to become law without his signature.

mcconnell-ends-silence-to-congratulate-biden-washington Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell. Brehman Caroline / Pool/ABACA Brehman Caroline / Pool/ABACA / Pool/ABACA

In advance of the veto, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said the bill would help deter Chinese aggression. Other Republican backers of the measure, including Sen John Thune – the second-ranking Senate leader, and Mike Gallagher – a member of the House Armed Services Committee, tweeted that the bill would counter threats from countries such as China.

Sen Jack Reed, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said President Trump’s declaration that China was the biggest winner in the defence bill was false. Reed also noted the shifting explanations President Trump had given for the veto.

“President Trump clearly hasn’t read the bill, nor does he understand what’s in it,” Reed said.

“There are several bipartisan provisions in here that get tougher on China than the Trump Administration has ever been.”

The measure guides Pentagon policy and cements decisions about troop levels, new weapons systems and military readiness, military personnel policy and other military goals. Many programmes can only go into effect if the bill is approved, including military construction.

McConnell, in a rare break with President Trump, had urged passage despite the threat to veto it. McConnell said it was important for Congress to continue its nearly six-decade-long streak of passing the defence policy bill.

Your Voice
Readers Comments
43
This is YOUR comments community. Stay civil, stay constructive, stay on topic. Please familiarise yourself with our comments policy here before taking part.
Leave a Comment
    Submit a report
    Please help us understand how this comment violates our community guidelines.
    Thank you for the feedback
    Your feedback has been sent to our team for review.

    Leave a commentcancel