Why Did Trump Veto the NDAA?
By: Jacquie Rose
Tags: Congress, Military, Donald Trump, USA, Politics

Why Did Trump Veto the NDAA?

Photo by Michael Afonso on Unsplash

On December 23, President Donald Trump vetoed the $741 billion National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The bill, which provides funding for the military, includes provisions such as pay raises for service members, military construction projects, and a counter-China fund.

Trump has telegraphed for months that he planned to veto the NDAA, offering various reasons as explanation. He disapproved of a provision to re-name bases named after Confederate leaders. Then he wanted a provision that repealed an internet free-speech law. Finally, and almost without clarification, he claimed that China would benefit from the bill.

His first threat to veto the bill came over the summer. Ten military bases are named for Confederate leaders. In the wake of the protests of racial injustice, Senator Elizabeth Warren (R-MA) inserted a provision to re-name those bases within three years. Trump disapproved of the provision, offering both tweets and official White House statements in support of the military bases with Confederate names.

Despite Trump’s veto threats, the re-naming provision was included in the final version of the NDAA.

Trump pivoted to Section 230 as another reason to veto the bill. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act shields internet platforms that host third-party content (such as Facebook, Twitter, Yelp, etc) from liability for what those third parties post. For example, if a user posted a defamatory comment about a business on Yelp, the business could sue the user, not Yelp.

Why does Trump want to undo Section 230? Social media companies, particularly Twitter, have been more aggressive this year in removing dangerous content, particularly about COVID-19 conspiracy theories or election results. He believes that Twitter has “censored” him unfairly.

Repealing Section 230 would have enormous implications for internet platforms and their users, but it does not even pertain to national defense; it pertains to commerce.

Trump provided the third reason for the veto in early December, claiming that China would benefit from the defense bill. He did not provide further clarification to that point, nor has he offered ways for the bill to be strengthened.

It is important to remember that the veto did not happen in a vacuum. Trump wanted to veto the bill and was in search of a reason. If the president had serious concerns, he would have participated in the negotiation process.

Similarly, Trump has threatened to veto the omnibus bill, which among other things includes $600 COVID relief checks. He offered two explanations for the veto threat — he wanted $2,000 for the stimulus checks instead of $600, and he decried the foreign aid in the bill. However, Trump did not participate in the negotiation process for this bill either. He probably could have pushed Congressional Republicans to support $2,000 stimulus checks had he tried, and the foreign aid that was included in the final version of the bill was in his own budget proposal.

The simplest explanation for his most recent moves is that Trump is upset about his election defeat. Jonathan Swan from Axios reported that Trump has tried to turn Congressional Republicans against Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) because McConnell acknowledged Joe Biden’s victory in the presidential election. According to Swan, Trump is signaling to other Republicans that he will lash out at anyone who does not remain in lock-step with him. National defense bills and stimulus checks are caught in the crossfire.

The ball is now in Congress’s court. Historically, veto overrides are rare. Congress has overridden fewer than ten percent of all presidential vetoes. Two-thirds of each chamber must vote in favor for the veto override. There is a chance that the NDAA could be overridden, as it was passed with rare bipartisan support, but that would require Republicans to move against the president.

Congressional Republicans will face an important test in the last week of December: will they continue to cave to Trump’s demands? Or will they move on from the whims of a defeated, outgoing president?