The U.S. House of Representatives has passed its version of the fiscal year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), marking a significant step toward what would be the nation’s first-ever trillion-dollar defense budget. The vote, held on September 11, 2025, saw the bill advance by a margin of 231-196, with support from all but four Republicans and a mere 17 Democrats, many of whom are members of the fiscally conservative Blue Dog Coalition, according to reporting from the Associated Press and other outlets.
The NDAA, a must-pass annual piece of legislation, sets policy and spending guidelines for the Pentagon and hundreds of military programs. This year’s bill authorizes $848 billion for defense programs, but when combined with a $150 billion defense spending increase included in the Republican budget signed into law by President Trump on July 4, the total defense funding will surpass the $1 trillion mark for the first time, as reported by the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft and corroborated by multiple news sources.
In addition to the headline-grabbing budget figure, the House’s NDAA includes a 3.8% pay raise for service members in 2026, a move widely supported across the aisle. House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., praised the bill as a “generational investment in our national defense,” while House Armed Services Committee Chair Mike Rogers, R-Ala., called it “a vote to modernize our military, support our troops and restore American deterrence.” Rogers also highlighted the bill’s alignment with President Trump’s “Peace Through Strength” agenda, stating, “The FY26 National Defense Authorization Act ensures our military forces remain the most lethal in the world and can deter any adversary.”
The legislation is notable for its sweeping reforms to the Pentagon’s acquisition and procurement processes. Chief among these is the Streamlining Procurement for Effective Execution and Delivery (SPEED) Act, co-sponsored by Rogers and Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., the ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee. The SPEED Act aims to shorten the Department of Defense’s requirements development process from an average of 800 days to just five months, ensuring that new capabilities reach warfighters more quickly. According to Meritalk, the bill also introduces the Urgent Innovative Technologies and Capabilities pilot, designed to fast-track the development and deployment of cutting-edge technologies, and establishes the BOOST program within the Defense Innovation Unit to convert promising commercial tech into full-scale defense programs.
Emerging technologies, space systems, and cybersecurity are at the forefront of the House’s defense priorities this year. The NDAA mandates major overhauls to the defense acquisition process, with a focus on accelerating procurement timelines and reducing bureaucratic delays. The bill expands training, oversight, and transparency mandates across the Department of Defense in response to growing national security concerns around cybersecurity and artificial intelligence. For AI systems, the legislation requires the inclusion of a software bill of materials to better track system components and detect vulnerabilities. It also authorizes up to 12 generative AI pilot projects and broadens cyber training to cover the safe and secure use of AI technologies.
Drones and counter-drone capabilities receive significant attention in the bill. The NDAA codifies the Joint Counter-Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Office as the Pentagon’s lead agency for combating small drone threats, providing it with formal authority and organizational support. A pilot program at two Air Force bases will integrate civilian sensor networks with existing base defense systems, enhancing the detection and response capabilities against rogue drones. The legislation also requires a review of the Defense Innovation Unit’s management of the Blue UAS list, the Pentagon’s vetted catalog of approved drone technologies.
While the bill’s focus on modernization and innovation has drawn praise from many quarters, it has also sparked intense partisan debate. House Republicans attached several conservative provisions to the NDAA, including amendments that block military health insurance coverage for gender transition care and restrict abortion care for service members. For the third consecutive year, the House NDAA also contains measures to block diversity initiatives and climate measures, moves that Democrats have criticized as “right-wing culture war” fodder. According to The Quincy Institute and Associated Press, the Senate is expected to push back against these provisions during the reconciliation process.
Rep. Adam Smith, the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, voted against the bill, citing the rejection of every Democratic amendment and what he described as “countless partisan amendments” that “silenced debate of critical issues.” Smith’s concerns were echoed by other Democrats, who argued that the GOP’s approach undermined bipartisan cooperation on national security. “They included countless partisan amendments and blocked debates on expanding the use of the military inside the country,” Smith said, as reported by AP.
Not all Republicans were satisfied with the final product either. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., opposed the bill after her proposed amendments to cut aid and security assistance to other countries were rejected. Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., criticized the overall level of spending, calling much of it unnecessary and expressing concern about the nation’s growing deficit.
One of the more historic elements of the bill is the inclusion of an amendment repealing the 1991 and 2002 war powers laws that authorized military action in Iraq. This move, viewed by some as long overdue, would formally end the legal basis for U.S. military operations in Iraq absent a new congressional declaration of war.
Despite the bill’s passage in the House, its future remains uncertain. The Senate is expected to pass its own version of the NDAA, which proposes $924.7 billion in total defense spending—a full $32 billion more than the House plan, according to Meritalk. Both chambers must reconcile their differences through a conference committee, with a final compromise bill required before the fiscal year deadline on September 30.
Another point of contention is the Pentagon’s ongoing failure to pass a financial audit. The Department of Defense remains the only federal agency never to have passed an audit, having failed seven in a row since 2018. Earlier this year, watchdog groups like the Quincy Institute identified at least $60 billion in potential annual savings through cuts to wasteful or inefficient programs. Critics argue that the record-breaking budget should be matched by greater transparency and fiscal responsibility.
As the legislative process moves forward, the stakes are high—not just for the nation’s military readiness, but for the broader debate over priorities, accountability, and the role of the United States on the global stage. With the Senate’s version of the NDAA expected soon, all eyes will be on the conference committee to see which provisions survive and what compromises will ultimately shape the country’s defense policy for 2026 and beyond.
The House’s passage of the NDAA signals a renewed commitment to military modernization and technological innovation, even as fierce debates over spending, social policy, and oversight continue to shape the contours of American defense policy.
