The annual defense authorization bill, historically one of the few pieces of major legislation Congress reliably passes each year, has become an increasingly common vehicle for unrelated policy riders that would struggle to pass as standalone bills.
The National Defense Authorization Act has passed every year for more than six decades, making it one of the few must-pass bills Congress can reliably count on moving through both chambers. That reliability has made it an increasingly attractive vehicle for lawmakers hoping to attach unrelated policy priorities that might otherwise struggle to gather enough standalone support to pass on their own merits.
Riders attached to recent versions of the bill have covered subjects with little direct connection to defense policy, from unrelated regulatory provisions to policy priorities that failed to advance through their own dedicated committee process, prompting some members to complain the bill has become bloated well beyond its original core purpose.
Reform proposals face an obvious conflict of interest
Several lawmakers have proposed restricting the bill to strictly defense-related provisions, but such reforms face an inherent obstacle: the same must-pass status that attracts unrelated riders is precisely what makes many members reluctant to give up the leverage it provides for advancing their own priorities.
“Everyone complains the bill has too many unrelated riders attached. Very few people are willing to give up their own rider to fix it.”
With no serious momentum behind stripping the bill down to a narrower scope, most observers expect the pattern to continue largely unchanged, with the defense bill remaining one of the most reliable vehicles in Congress for passing policy that couldn’t otherwise clear the floor on its own.
