Trump vetoes the US military spending bill and is likely to settle with Congress

On Wednesday, President Donald Trump vetoed the annual defense policy bill, which followed up on threats to veto a measure that has widespread bipartisan support in Congress and potentially set up the first overriding vote in his presidency.

The bill confirms 3% wage increases for US troops and authorizes more than $ 740 billion in military programs and construction.

The move came while Trump was being held in the White House, ugly about his election loss and escalating his suspension with Republicans when he pushed fraudulent conspiracy theories and tried to pressure them to support his efforts to reverse the results.

The House was ready to return Monday and the Senate on Tuesday to consider votes to override the president’s veto against the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA.

Trump’s move provoked rapid condemnation, with Parliament Speaker Nancy Pelosi calling it “an act of dizzying negligence that harms our troops, jeopardizes our security and undermines the will of the bipartisan Congress.”

Senator Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, avoided any criticism of Trump, but called the NDAA “absolutely necessary for our national security and our troops.” … Our men and women who voluntarily wear the uniform should not be denied what they need – ever. ”

Long before the veto was issued, Trump offered a series of rationalities to reject it. He has urged lawmakers to include boundaries for social media companies that he claimed were biased against him – and to remove languages ​​that allow for the renaming of military bases such as Fort Benning and Fort Hood that honor Confederate leaders. Without going into detail, he has claimed that the biggest winner from the defense would be China.

In his veto to the House, Trump cited these objections, saying that the measure “does not include critical national security measures, contains provisions that do not respect our veterans and our military history, and runs counter to my government’s efforts to put America first on our national security and foreign policy measures.” It is a “gift” to China and Russia. “

He also wrote: “Many provisions of the law are in direct conflict with my government’s foreign policy, especially my attempt to get our troops home.

Both the House and the Senate approved the measure by margins large enough to override a presidential veto. Trump had previously vetoed eight bills, but those vetoes were upheld because supporters did not get the two-thirds of the votes needed in each House for the bill to become law without Trump’s signature.

Senator Mark Warner, D-Va., Called Trump’s veto “impeccable” and said he would “look forward to overriding it.”

Prior to the veto, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., Said the bill would help deter Chinese aggression. Other GOP supporters of the measure, including South Dakota Senator John Thune, the second-ranked Senate leader, and Wisconsin Rep. Mike Gallagher, a member of the House Armed Services Committee, have tweeted that the bill would counter threats from countries. as China.

Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, said Trump’s statement that China was the biggest winner in the defense bill was false. Reed also noted the staggered explanations Trump gave for the veto.

“President Trump has obviously not read the bill, and he does not understand what is in it,” Reed said. “There are several bipartisan regulations here that will be tougher on China than the Trump administration has ever been.”

The measure governs the Pentagon’s policy and cements decisions on troop levels, new weapon systems and military readiness, military personnel policy and other military objectives. Many programs can only enter into force if the bill is approved, including military construction.

McConnell, in a rare break with Trump, had called for access despite Trump’s threat to veto it. McConnell said it was important for Congress to continue its nearly six-decade-long path of defending defense policy.