The Biden Administration and Democrat leaders, however, targeted parts of the NDAA that did not suit their woke agenda.  Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries pushed hard for President Joe Biden’s woke agenda during the House/Senate Conference Committee meetings behind closed doors in December.

House conferees had to “recede” to the Senate 817 times, compared to 481 times when the Senate deferred to the House.  The resulting Conference Committee Report (CCR) included some steps in the right direction, but key social policy provisions, most often in the House defense bill, were removed or revised.  Details of what happened, with House and Senate bill section numbers noted, are analyzed here:  

• CMR Policy Analysis: NDAA for 2024: Missed Opportunities Must be Revisited

The resulting defense bill, now signed into law as P.L. 118-31, made progress in the right direction, but more needs to be done.  The following summary highlights each issue of concern and provides a roadmap for what Congress can do to fix our military in the coming year.

1.  Modified Meritocracy Language Fails to End Racial Discrimination

Congressional action to affirm Meritocracy in the Military is necessary because the Department of Defense (DoD) and military service academy authorities intend to circumvent the recent Supreme Court ruling prohibiting racial discrimination in higher education.  (Students for Fair Admissions (SFFA) vs. Harvard and the University of N. Carolina)

The military service academies were not parties to the Harvard/UNC cases, but the Supreme Court did not exempt ROTC programs from its ruling ending racial discrimination in higher education.  Congress, which has the constitutional power to make policy for the military, should have followed the lead of the Supreme Court by specifically prohibiting racial discrimination in military service academy admissions, command selections, promotions, and assignments. 

Sec. 529C of the Conference Committee Report (CCR) revised and reduced several meritocracy measures to a minimalist statement: “Merit Requirement – A military accession or a promotion in the Department of Defense shall be based on individual merit and demonstrated performance.” 

Missing from this provision is the word “exclusively,” which Democrat Conferees deleted from its placement just before “on individual merit and demonstrated performance.”  Omission of the word “exclusively” could be interpreted as a loophole allowing DoD officials to continue using racial discrimination to achieve DEI “equity” and “inclusion” goals.  Percentage-based metrics are not the same as non-discrimination, equal opportunity, and individual rights. 

In another positive but incomplete step, CCR Sec. 563 required the military service academies to “consider standardized test scores” as part of the application process. (emphasis added) This will help in countering pressures to drop such tests to advance diversity, but Congress still needs to assign heavier weight to objective test scores than to less consequential subjective factors.

In the coming year, Congress should explicitly prohibit racial discrimination and restore meritocracy as the sole consideration in all military personnel decisions.

2.  Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion (DEI) Programs and Chief Diversity Officers (CDOs)

Democrat leaders and Conferees resisted attempts to defund or abolish all DEI offices military-wide, including the Defense Department’s Chief Diversity Officer (CDO).  However, CCR Sec. 1101 incorporated identical measures prohibiting the Defense Secretary from appointing or employing military or civilian employees whose duties include diversity, equity, and inclusion, and whose rank or pay grade is higher than GS-10 (up to $70,000).  (This pay cap may have the effect of indirectly eliminating the Defense Department’s high-paying CDO position.)

In another positive move, the CCR adopted House provisions barring the Secretary of Defense from establishing any new positions with responsibility for DEI matters or filling any vacancies in DEI offices.  The effect could be short-lived, however, since mandates will expire upon delivery of a Comptroller General report on the DoD DEI workforce. 

On the negative side, conferees rejected a House provision that would have prohibited discrimination or quotas in admissions to the military service academies for one year, FY 2024.  The Conference also refused to “sunset” a new DEI institution called the Defense Advisory Committee on Diversity and Inclusion (DACODAI), by September 19, 2024.  This high-level bureaucratic power base likely will perpetuate divisive DEI programs that weaken meritocracy in the military.

3.  Critical Race Theory (CRT) and Anti-Extremism Programs

Several House and Senate sections that would have reduced critical race theory (CRT) and “anti-extremist” programs in the military were dropped or neutralized by NDAA Conferees. 

For example, CCR Sec. 576 prohibited the use of federal funds to endorse critical race theory at the military service academies, and defined CRT as “. . . the theory that individuals, by virtue of race, ethnicity, color, or national origin, bear collective guilt and are inherently responsible for actions committed in the past by other individuals of such race.”

This was a positive step, but with a catch.  Conferees added a gratuitous “technical amendment” to protect the “academic freedom” of instructors to select textbooks and other classroom materials and instructions.  As Sean Davis of The Federalist noted, universities only use academic freedom to defend left-wing fellow travelers from criticism and accountability. 

Ironically, the NDAA’s protections for “academic freedom” in military education come at a time when disturbing antisemitic demonstrations are occurring on many college campuses.  Some observers believe that anti-Israel protests may be a consequence of Marxist CRT ideological teachings that divide people into warring groups, the “oppressors” and the “oppressed.”

At the same time, Congress rejected language protecting “ideological freedom.”  A House-approved measure would have prohibited the Defense Department from compelling service members to believe or declare a belief in certain politically based and race-based ideological concepts that the House NDAA described in detail, but the text was modified.

CCR Sec. 576 disavowed only one tenet of CRT – that an individual, because of their race, bears responsibility for the actions of others of the same race, color, or national origin.  Left on the cutting room floor were several more clauses describing key elements of toxic CRT ideology, including attacks on America’s founding fathers and documents.  These divisive beliefs should not be promoted in military education, especially programs serving military dependent children. 

4.  Gender Identity and Transgender Policies

The House NDAA included legislation to prohibit TRICARE from covering and the DoD from furnishing sex reassignment surgeries and gender hormone treatments for transgender individuals.  Democrats on the Conference Committee, however, eliminated these measures. 

Conferees also rejected a House-passed measure that would have stopped the DoD from providing gender transition procedures, including surgery or irreversible hormone treatments, through the Exceptional Family Member Program for children. 

The increasingly controversial transgender issue involves high costs for medical treatments and surgeries, increased non-deployability, plus privacy violations for women forced to share private living spaces, showers and athletic teams with biological men.  The Biden Administration and Democrat leaders, unfortunately, are committed to the reality-denying side. 

5.  Abortion Travel and Time Off Subsidies

In October 2022, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin issued a controversial memo unilaterally authorizing generous time off and transportation subsidies for servicewomen seeking abortions in states different from their home base.  Congress could have ended Sen. Tommy Tuberville’s  months-long protest by supporting the House NDAA provision that would have nullified the Austin memo and prohibited the Secretary of Defense from paying for or reimbursing expenses relating to “non-covered” abortion services across state lines.  This failure to act could encourage the Secretary of Defense to impose more controversial policies that advance the woke agenda without congressional authorization.

6.  Drag Shows on Military Bases and Digital Recruiting Ambassadors

NDAA Conferees missed the opportunity to codify Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s promise to end drag queen performances and story hours for dependent children on military bases.  They also failed to permanently end the already discontinued “digital recruiting ambassador” program that credentialed a flamboyant gay sailor to post videos as drag queen Harpy Daniels.   

Instead, the Conference Report allowed reinstatement of the controversial program if certain requirements are met. (Sec. 594) The NDAA should have mentioned the demoralizing effect of sexualized entertainment on military culture and discipline, and prohibited it on military bases, especially in the presence of children.

7.  Parents Rights – DoD Education Activity (DoDEA) Schools

CCR Sec. 589 incorporated several solid House measures to protect the rights of parents with children in Department of Defense Education Activity (DoDEA) schools with regard to curriculum, instructional materials, and parental consent on medical matters. 

However, CCR Sec. 589 added a new clause under (c.) Exceptions, which delays for two years the effective date of requirements for parents to “inspect a list of the books and other reading materials contained in the library of the school,” and to “provide parents access to the online school library catalog.” (emphasis added) The purpose of delayed enforcement is not explained. 

Conferees also rejected a House-passed measure that would have prohibited DoDEA schools from purchasing pornographic and radical gender ideology books for their libraries.       

Mandates in CCR Sec. 589 for swift parental notification if a child receives emergency medical care . HUmake sense, but the purpose of a change in the definition a child’s “medical examination or screening” by a “non-clinical school staff” is not clear. 

8.  Sex-Neutral Standards for Combat Arms MOSs (Army Combat Fitness Test)

Years of tests with the failed Army Combat Fitness Test (ACFT) confirmed difficulties in training both men and women with sex-neutral standards in combat arms units, which require greater physical strength and endurance for survival and mission accomplishment.

Conferees retained a House provision calling for sex neutral ACFT standards for specific combat occupations, such as infantry, armor, field artillery, and Special Operations Forces.  However, the CCR changed the phrase “sex-neutral” to “increased minimum fitness standards” for a specific list of military occupational specialties (MOSs) or areas of concentration. 

Omitting the politically sensitive phrase “sex-neutral” may help to focus attention on combat effectiveness, not sex or women’s careers, but Congress will have to exercise diligent oversight to restore higher fitness standards in the Army’s most physically demanding occupations, including field positions that the Conference Committee dropped from the legislative list.

9.  COVID Mandate Repeal and Restitution

CCR Sec. 526 incorporated a House measure to prohibit adverse action against servicemembers solely on the basis of refusing a COVID-19 vaccination (if they had submitted a request for a religious, administrative, or medical exemption) and directed the military departments to consider reinstatement.  CCR Sec. 527 also required a review board to grant a request for review of a discharge or dismissal based solely on failure to obey a lawful order regarding the COVID-19 vaccine.  (Only 3% of COVID-19 resisters have requested reinstatement.)

The Secretary of Defense is required to establish a process for removing adverse actions against cadets or midshipmen returning to military service or to a service academy, but conferees did not incorporate a House measure that would have exempted cadets or midshipmen from being required to repay tuition if they were not tendered an appointment as a commissioned officer on the sole basis that they refused to receive a COVID-19 vaccination. 

10.  Climate Change Executive Orders and Mandates

On the positive side, Conferees incorporated several House measures to mitigate “climate change” mandates, including rule changes requiring federal contractors to meet greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets. (CCR Sec. 318)  Conferees also approved a House-passed measure requiring assurance from the Defense Secretary that sufficient recharging infrastructure is in place to support electric non-tactical vehicle fleets in covered military installations, prior to deployment.  (CCR Sec. 319)

However, Conferees did not accept a House measure that would have prohibited the DOD from implementing recent climate change executive orders, and another that would have prohibited funds for advisory committees related to environmental, social, and governance (ESG) aspects.

11.  Displays of Unapproved Flags

NDAA Conferees approved House language prohibiting displays of unapproved flags in DoD public spaces, identifying acceptable banners, such as the American flag, state, military unit, veterans, POW/MIA, and religious flags, plus other banners “approved at the discretion of the military chain of command or senior civilian leadership, as appropriate.” 

The final defense bill affirms “the authority of a military commander to enforce good order and discipline on a military installation,” but it does not mention flags associated with “LGBT Pride” or other controversial events.

12.  Requests for Information and Congressional Oversight

In addition to provisions approved in the signed law, P.L. 118-31, the House has called for numerous studies, reports, and data from DoD officials on a variety of controversial issues.  These include a “Gender Identity Impact Study for Female Active Duty Servicemembers” to address how: “the [gender-identity] changes impact natal born women servicemembers and civilian personnel, including in women only spaces such as bathrooms and locker rooms.” 

House members also asked for reports on “Religious Freedom Training,” one on “Extremism-Related Training and Education Programs for Servicemembers,” and publication of training materials of the controversial Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI).  These studies and more could inspire future legislation to end wokeism in the military. 

Conclusion: Congress Must Revisit Missed Opportunities

Americans are counting on diligent congressional oversight and a renewed fight against woke policies that take progressivism to extremes and impose them with coercion, even if it hurts the institution.  The current Congress has made great progress dealing with these woke personnel issues – in some cases for the first time – but members must revisit missed opportunities to eliminate wokeism and support sound policies in the only military we have.   

* * * * * *

The Center for Military Readiness (CMR) is an independent public policy organization, founded by President Elaine Donnelly in 1993, which reports on and analyzes military/social issues.  The referenced CMR Policy Analysis was prepared for educational purposes; it does not constitute endorsement of legislation.  More information is available at www.cmrlink.org.