During last week’s debate over the annual defense authorization bill, House lawmakers inserted language in the massive military policy measure to require a new assessment from the Defense Department on “the threat of rifle-toting robot dogs used by China” in potential future conflicts.

The issue has gained public attention in recent weeks after Chinese military officials showed off armed robotic quadrupeds during recent military drills with Cambodia.

In a video released by state-run CCTV on May 25, a 110-pound dog-like robot is shown carrying and firing an automatic rifle. A spokesman for the Chinese military said the robot, which can perform many tasks autonomously, could “serve as a new member in our urban combat operations.”

Drone warfare is not new to the U.S. or foreign militaries, and the American military for years has experimented with robot dogs for use in reconnaissance and unit support roles.

But the idea of a robot version of man’s best friend shooting at American soldiers was enough to prompt House members to demand that the secretary of defense investigate “the threat such use poses to the national security of the United States.”

The amendment was adopted without objection from any members of the chamber. But it will have to survive negotiations with senators on the broader defense measure in coming months before it can become law.

The Senate is expected to hold floor debate and make possible amendments to its draft of the legislation in the next few weeks.

“No U.S. boots will be on the ground,” Biden said. “A temporary pier will enable a massive increase in the amount of humanitarian assistance getting into Gaza every day. And Israel must also do its part. Israel must allow more aid into Gaza and ensure that humanitarian workers aren’t caught in the cross fire.

“To the leadership of Israel I say this: Humanitarian assistance cannot be a secondary consideration or a bargaining chip.”

Senior administration officials told reporters earlier Thursday the mission would route humanitarian aid through Cyprus to the temporary port in Gaza. The White House is also pushing Israel and Egypt to allow more aid through the land crossings at Rafah and Kerem Shalom.

The announcement, which drew bipartisan applause from lawmakers gathered, came amid calls from Biden for Congress to pass his long-stalled foreign aid bill to arm Israel, Ukraine and Taiwan.

The Senate passed the $95 billion foreign aid plan by a 70-29 vote in February. It includes $14 billion in Israel military aid, $48 billion in security assistance for Ukraine and $4 billion to arm Taiwan.

Israel receives an annual $3.8 billion in U.S. military aid, but the White House has said the Defense Department lacks the replenishment funds needed to continue arming Ukraine from U.S. stockpiles.

There’s also $2.4 billion in the bill for U.S. Central Command to respond to the uptick in attacks on American forces since the Israel-Hamas war began in October 2023; as well as $542 million for U.S. Indo-Pacific Command in response to its fiscal 2024 unfunded priorities list.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has so far refused to put the bill on the floor amid growing resistance to additional Ukraine aid from Republican lawmakers as well as opposition from former President Donald Trump, the frontrunner in the GOP presidential primary race.

“Now assistance to Ukraine is being blocked by those who want to walk away from our world leadership,” said Biden, invoking former Republican President Ronald Reagan. “Now my predecessor tells Putin ‘do whatever the hell you want.”

The reference to Trump’s remarks at a campaign rally last month in which the former president voiced frustration with some NATO allies underspending on defense drew “boos” from Republicans in the crowd.

“Send me the bipartisan National Security Bill. History is watching,” Biden said, staring down Republican members of Congress who have opposed the measure. “If the United States walks away now, it will put Ukraine at risk, Europe at risk, the free world at risk, emboldening others who wish to do us harm.”

Biden also promised a strong response to other national security threats, including strikes to degrade Houthi capabilities in the Red Sea. “As commander in chief, I will not hesitate to direct further measures to protect our people and military personnel.”

Despite limited details about the plan for a humanitarian port, the idea drew immediate praise from Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Jack Reed, D-R.I., and fellow panel member Angus King, I-Maine, who last week urged the administration to deploy a Navy hospital ship to the region.

“The civilian suffering in Gaza must be alleviated, and a maritime aid route will enable large quantities of food, shelter, and medical supplies to be delivered to those who need it most,” the pair said in a statement. “This temporary port, along with the ongoing airdrop campaign, will help ease the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.”

On Wednesday, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Turner, R-Ohio, released a statement announcing that “the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence has made available to all members of Congress information concerning a serious national security threat.”

He also urged President Joe Biden to declassify details of the threat as soon as possible.

The news spurred alarm and confusion among members of Congress. Overnight, the Associated Press reported the issue centered on highly sensitive intelligence concerning Russian anti-satellite weapons currently under development.

White House National Security Communications Advisor John Kirby partially confirmed those reports on Thursday, but declined to give specifics on the weapon. Kirby said the weapon would be based in space, but was not currently in orbit.

“This is not an active capability that has been deployed,” he told reporters at a White House briefing. “And though Russia’s pursuit of this particular capability is troubling, there is no immediate threat to anyone’s safety. You’re not talking about a weapon that can be used to attack human beings or cause physical destruction here on Earth.”

Several members of Congress were scheduled to receive a briefing on the issue later on Thursday. Kirby said that any anti-satellite capability “should be of general concern because there are a number of private and public satellites circling the Earth every day,” but there is not a need for immediate international response.

“I would not speak publicly about our strategic deterrent capabilities one way or the other,” he said. “But we’re taking this potential threat very, very seriously.”

Kirby declined to say whether White House officials were upset with Turner for making news of the threat public, deferring questions to the congressional committee.

Turner issued a statement Thursday saying that his panel “worked in consultation with the Biden Administration to notify Congress of this national security threat” and that administration officials were informed of his announcement before it was released.

Kirby said U.S. officials are in contact with Russian representatives about their concerns. Relations between the two countries have been strained by American support for Ukrainian forces in their fight against Russia.

Even after the Senate’s confirmation of hundreds of Defense Department leadership posts on Tuesday, 23 senior military nominees remain stalled in Congress because of holds related to senators’ concerns about Pentagon policies surrounding abortion and diversity training.

When and whether those individuals will advance remains unclear. After celebrating the promotion of 422 senior military officers on Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., warned that “military nominees should never, never become pawns to push a partisan agenda” and vowed to continue to push back against similar Republican efforts.

Since late February, Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., had blocked quick consideration of nearly every senior military nomination over his objection to the Defense Department’s abortion access policies, which allow for leave time and travel stipends for troops forced cross state lines to obtain abortion services due to local restrictions.

On Tuesday, Tuberville mostly ended that protest but retained his blockade on 11 four-star nominees still pending before the Senate, saying he would continue to use the procedural move to highlight the “illegal” abortion policies.

That list of senior officers includes:

• Air Force Lt. Gen. Kevin B. Schneider, to be commander of Pacific Air Forces
• Air Force Gen. Kenneth S. Wilsbach, to be head of Air Combat Command
• Air Force Lt. Gen. Gregory M. Guillot, to be head of U.S. Northern Command
• Air Force Lt. Gen. Timothy D. Haugh, to be head of U.S. Cyber Command
• Air Force Lt. Gen. James C. Slife, to be Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force
• Army Lt. Gen. James J. Mingus, to be Vice Chief of Staff of the Army
• Navy Vice Adm. James W. Kilby, to be Vice Chief of Naval Operations
• Navy Vice Adm. Stephen T. Koehler, to be head of U.S. Pacific Fleet
• Navy Vice Adm. William J. Houston, to be director of the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program
• Space Force Lt. Gen. Michael A. Guetlein, to be Vice Chief of Space Operations
• Space Force Lt. Gen. Stephen N. Whiting, to be head of U.S. Space Command

Separate from those blocks, Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., on Wednesday announced he is blocking quick consideration of six other senior military officers “relating to concerns that he has regarding those nominees’ stances or actions relating to divisive diversity, equity, and inclusion programs in the military,” according to a statement released by his office.

Schmitt did not detail the specific accusations against the officers he singled out, a list that includes Schneider (already being held up by Tuberville) and Navy Rear Adm. Shoshana S. Chatfield, President Joe Biden’s pick to be the military representative to NATO. The other nominees being blocked by Schmitt are:

• Air Force Brig. Gen. Paul D. Moga
• Air Force Brig. Gen. Scott A. Cain
• Air Force Col. Benjamin R. Jonsson
• Army Col. Andrew O. Saslav

Seven others are being held up for procedural reasons, and could be advanced in coming days. They include Army Maj. Gen. Michele H. Bredenkamp, nominated to be a senior advisor to the director of National Intelligence; Army Maj. Gen. Stephen G. Smith, tapped to be the next chief of staff for U.S. Army Forces Command; Air Force Col. David J. Berkland; Army Brig. Gen. Lawrence G. Ferguson; Army Col. John W. Sannes; Navy Rear Adm. Jeffrey Czerewko; and Navy Capt. Brian J. Anderson.

Both Tuberville and Schmitt’s holds do not prevent a floor vote on the individual nominees, a process that can take up hours of floor time for each name.

Senate Armed Services Committee leaders had said going through those procedural moves for hundreds of nominees would have taken months of work, preventing any other chamber business from being completed.

However, getting through the list of 23 still-pending nominees should take only a few days or weeks of floor time, depending on debate agreements to be negotiated between Democratic and Republican senators.

Schumer did not announce any imminent plans for those floor votes. The Senate is scheduled to be in session until Dec. 15, but has a host of budget items and other legislative priorities scheduled for the final working days of 2023.

If the nominations aren’t settled before the end of December, lawmakers will be able to consider them in 2024.

In a statement Tuesday, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin praised the advancement of the 422 defense nominations, but added “we also look forward to the Senate’s confirmation of the remainder of our highly qualified and apolitical military leaders, so that America can have the fully fielded team it deserves during this critical moment for our national security.”

If passed, the measure could affect more than four million Americans, including numerous veterans and tens of thousands of Defense Department civilian employees. But the bill faces long odds of becoming law, and is certain to face significant opposition from other members of Congress whose districts include large numbers of federal workers.

Gaetz promoted the measure as a way to rein in the “weaponized” national security state. He also accused federal workers of abusing their positions to “control and influence” Americans’ political beliefs, with a bias against conservatives and former President Donald Trump.

The penalties would cover public discussion by any worker who has passed “a security clearance investigation, periodic reinvestigation, or other determination of eligibility to access classified information by an authorized adjudicative agency.”

It would not include disclosing that information for federal employment or government contracting purposes.

Gaetz made headlines this week for spearheading an effort to oust Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., from his former Speaker of the House leadership post. The legislative proposal comes as the process for maintaining security clearances is getting an overhaul.

Earlier this week, officials from the Office of Personnel Management — which helps facilitate background investigations required to obtain and maintain clearances — announced they will expand “continuous vetting” for federal employees in non-sensitive positions.

Continuous vetting allows for constant monitoring of employees’ files for eligibility changes instead of relying on lengthy periodic reinvestigations. The policy is already in place for the national security workforce.

Now, the goal is for the low-risk population to be fully enrolled this fiscal year, according to OPM.

About 4.2 million government and contract personnel hold a security clearance, of which most are DoD-clearance holders, according to data by Clearance Jobs.

No timeline has been announced for when Gaetz’ bill may be considered by a congressional committee or on the chamber floor.

Reporter Molly Weisner contributed to this report.

However, Rogers told Defense News he will still hold up numerous other reprogramming requests to protest the Air Force’s failure to make a long-overdue decision whether to base U.S. Space Command headquarters in Colorado or his home state of Alabama.

“The hold doesn’t apply to anything to do with compensation,” Rogers said July 18.

Military Times first reported last week the House Armed Services Committee’s delay in approving a routine reprogramming request for the Pentagon to shift funds between accounts was forcing the Air Force to postpone some permanent change of station moves, selective reenlistment bonuses and other cash incentives for airmen.

The holdup prompted the Pentagon and Air Force to each circulate sets of talking points to congressional offices last week. The Air Force memo, obtained by Defense News, noted the shortfall is “driven by higher than projected personnel costs.”

The Pentagon customarily addresses these shortfalls by bundling reprogramming requests that move funds from accounts with surpluses to accounts with deficits. Top lawmakers on the armed services and appropriations committees in each chamber must then sign off on them.

The Defense Department submitted its reprogramming request to preserve airmen’s compensation in May. The Senate Armed Services Committee and both appropriations panels had already signed off on it, but Rogers did not do so until this week.

“The committee has approved reprogramming requests related to military personnel and continues to review additional reprogramming requests from the Department of Defense,” Rogers’ spokeswoman, Justine Sanders, said in a statement Tuesday.

But the May reprogramming request contained several other, non-personnel-related reprogramming requests, including $150 million in modernization funds for the Puget Sound shipyard in Washington state. Rogers and other committee leaders can approve the reprogramming items piecemeal, and it’s unclear whether he’ll approve projects that don’t affect troop compensation.

Further complicating matters, the Pentagon submitted another, larger reprogramming request June 30. The Pentagon usually submits a bundle of reprogramming requests every year on this date; the document can take weeks to review.

Congress typically approves the request in September just before the end of the fiscal year. Both the House and Senate Armed Services committees are still reviewing the June 30 request.

The 64-page June 30 request, posted online by Punchbowl News, includes numerous budget reprogramming items pending approval. That includes more Puget Sound modernization funds, specifically $132 million for dry docks “to mitigate the risk of seismic activity while nuclear vessels are under maintenance in those facilities.”

While Rogers has made it clear he will not hold requests affecting compensation, it remains to be seen which of the hundreds of other reprogramming items — if any — he will approve from the May and June requests.

The Alabama and Colorado congressional delegations are engaged in an increasingly acrimonious fight over the Space Command basing decision amid the Air Force’s refusal to make an expeditious decision.

Two years ago, during the final days of the Trump administration, the Air Force announced Huntsville, Alabama — the site of the Army’s Redstone Arsenal and home to the Missile Defense Agency — would serve as the new location for Space Command headquarters, moving it from its provisional location in Colorado Springs.

The decision infuriated Colorado’s congressional delegation, who asked the Air Force to review the decision. Several Colorado Democrats argued it was an act of political retaliation because President Joe Biden won the swing state in the 2020 election.

The Air Force has yet to make a final decision despite the two-year review.

Sen. John Hickenlooper, D-Colo., released a statement last week saying Rogers’ hold on “routinely allocating funds is dangerous and harmful.”

“The Alabama delegation is holding our military service members hostage,” said Hickenlooper. “They are risking our national security to get what they want.”

The Colorado delegation is finding itself outgunned on the congressional Armed Services and appropriations committees.

House Republican Doug Lamborn, who represents the Colorado Springs district where the temporary Space Command facility is located, failed to undo a provision on the issue from Rogers when the Armed Services Committee considered the fiscal 2024 National Defense Authorization Act last month.

Rogers’ provision halts military construction on the temporary Space Command headquarters in Colorado Springs until Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall submits a report justifying its final location. It would also freeze half of Kendall’s travel budget until Congress receives the justification and decision.

The House narrowly passed the defense bill July 14 with Rogers’ Space Command provision intact. Alabama Republican Tommy Tuberville sits on the Senate Armed Services Committee and inserted the same provision in the upper chamber’s defense bill, which senators began debating on the floor this week.

McDonough is scheduled to testify on the fiscal 2024 budget request and related issues before the Senate Appropriations Committee on April 26. A day earlier, the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee will hold a separate hearing on the health records modernization effort, which was completely halted on April 21.

The decision to “reset” the program came after months of delays and complaints about the new system, currently in use at five VA health care sites. Additional deployments were scheduled for later this year, but have now been put on hold indefinitely.

Lawmakers on the House committee have already questioned whether the $16-billion, 10-year project will ever be fully functional. Although only a portion of that total is included in the department’s nearly $325 billion budget request for next fiscal year, McDonough will likely face significant questions about the ongoing costs and plan ahead for the program.

Abercrombie currently serves as deputy assistant to the president and as a coordinator for defense policy and arms control on the National Security Council. She previously worked as acting deputy director of the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, and has held numerous leadership positions within the Defense Department since 2003.

If confirmed, she would take over the office from Tanya Skeen, who served in the post for the last 13 months in an acting role. The job oversees various acquisition program management responsibilities, including development of space, intelligence and business systems.

Her nomination comes two days after Radha Iyengar Plumb was confirmed as deputy assistant secretary of defense for acquisition in a 68-30 Senate vote.

It was one of only a few Pentagon leadership posts to be confirmed this year, since Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., announced a hold on all Defense Department nominations and promotions over his objection to military policies regarding travel allowances for troops to receive abortion services.

Senate Democrats have decried the move and urged Tuberville’s Republican colleagues to intervene. But Tuberville on Thursday said he has had no contact from top Defense Department officials in recent weeks over the issue, and has no plans to relent in his objections.

No timetable was set for when Abercrombie may appear before the Senate Armed Services Committee for her confirmation hearing.

In a national security statement first obtained by Military Times, administration officials said threatened Republican cuts to that budget would damage efforts to counter threats from China and Russia, set back plans to modernize the Navy and Air Force, and damage military planning by severely limiting defense spending.

The Biden brushback is part of a coordinated Democratic response to defend the White House budget in anticipation of GOP attacks in months of Capital Hill debate to come. If a compromise on next year’s budget can’t be agreed upon by Oct. 1, it could trigger a partial government shutdown, leading to canceled military training and furloughs of non-essential Defense Department personnel.

The administration is taking aim specifically at a plan backed by some House Freedom Caucus members to cap federal spending at 2022 levels.

“Their proposal could amount to a roughly $600 billion reduction in funding for national defense over just the next five years compared to the president’s budget — undermining military readiness, weakening our deterrence against China, and impeding our ability to meet pressing global challenges, both now and in the future,” the statement says, adding that it would hinder investments in priorities such as the Pacific Deterrence Initiative and the procurement of critical munitions.

While the White House statement asserts that Republicans are focused on across-the-board budget cuts – including to national security – top GOP lawmakers have called for higher defense spending in recent hearings.

Both House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike Rogers, R-Ala., and Senate Armed Services Committee ranking member Roger Wicker, R-Miss., have called Biden’s $842 billion military spending plan for next year “inadequate.”

On Thursday, during a Defense Department budget hearing, Rep. Ken Calvert, R-Calif., and chairman of the House Appropriations Committee’s defense panel, told Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin that “we’re going to work together to plus this somewhat” i.e. to raise defense spending even higher.

But the White House charges that the slimmed down budgets, as required by the 2022 spending proposal, would require the Navy to cut “at least two capital ships” while “eliminating a new Virginia class submarine and a new DDG-51 destroyer.” For the Air Force, the plan “would likely cause significant disruption and delays to the B-21 bomber program.”

In a statement connected to the White House release, House Appropriations Committee ranking member Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., echoed the administration’s concerns, saying that the proposed budget levels “put our national security at risk, undermine military readiness, break promises made to our allies, and gravely impact the brave women and men in uniform who defend our country.”

How the latest attack influences the budget debate remains unclear. Earlier in the day, during a House Veterans’ Affairs Committee hearing on the White House budget plan, Republican lawmakers grew increasingly angry with Democratic members who accused them of aiming to trim defense and veterans program funding, and vowed to correct the record as budget negotiations continue through the summer.

Pentagon officials have urged lawmakers from both parties to avoid a fall budget showdown, and warned against cutting too deeply into non-defense spending, while protecting military funding.

Pentagon Comptroller Mike McCord argued in a letter to lawmakers this week that non-defense spending cuts would be “just as harmful” to national security.

“Our whole-of-government response to Russia’s aggression against Ukraine clearly demonstrates the value of integrating security assistance, economic assistance, humanitarian assistance, sanctions and export controls,” McCord wrote. “No one agency could achieve the effects we are producing as a team, and deep cuts to any one of the agencies would undermine the effort as a whole.”

The administration issued only limited details, but spotlighted $9.1 billion in proposed investments for the Pentagon’s Pacific Deterrence Initiative, meant to bolster U.S. force posture in the region amid increasing tensions with China. The spending plan also includes $37.7 billion for the Defense Department to continue modernizing the U.S. nuclear arsenal.

“This budget cements our commitment to confronting global challenges and keeping America safe,” President Joe Biden wrote in an accompanying message to Congress. “It outlines crucial investments to out-compete China globally and to continue support for Ukraine in the face of unprovoked Russian aggression.”

The budget proposal pledges $6 billion to support Ukraine, though it’s unclear whether that money is for military or economic aid. That figure falls far short of the $113 billion Congress allocated for Kyiv via emergency supplemental spending last year.

Pentagon officials are scheduled to discuss the details of the department’s budget on Monday. The White House proposal also vowed to optimize and modernize U.S. naval shipbuilding, but did not detail any specific dollar amounts.

The document stated that the budget “continues the recapitalization of the Nation’s strategic ballistic missile submarine fleet while investing in the submarine industrial base” and makes “meaningful investments in improving the lethality and survivability of the fleet, particularly improving undersea superiority.” That includes “the recapitalization and optimization of the four public Naval Shipyards to meet future submarine and carrier maintenance requirements.”

According to the administration, the budget also “invests in key technologies and sectors of the U.S. industrial base such as microelectronics, submarine construction, munitions production, and biomanufacturing.”

Funds allocated to the Energy Department will support “the strong technical and engineering foundation” for the trilateral AUKUS agreement between the United States, Australia and the United Kingdom, which the leaders of the three countries are expected to unveil in more detail in San Diego on Monday.

Congressional headwinds

The defense spending proposal is expected to face harsh criticism from Republicans lawmakers, both for being too small to meet global threats and too large to meet deficit reduction goals.

The release of the White House budget draft kicks off the public debate over spending for the next fiscal year, which starts Oct. 1, and negotiating a full-year budget plan is expected to take months. Already, House Republican leaders have simultaneously promised to trim federal spending while boosting funding for national security needs, including the military.

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., for his part, has vowed to cut at least $130 billion in non-discretionary spending, raising questions as to how the Republican-controlled House can accommodate a defense budget increase.

Some defense hawks, like House Defense Appropriations subcommittee Chairman Ken Calvert, R-Calif., have started looking at ways to squeeze savings out of the Pentagon. Calvert, for instance, has proposed trimming the Defense Department’s civilian workforce.

However, the Biden administration said its budget will “strengthen” the Pentagon’s “civilian workforce as a critical contributor to the nation’s security.”

The Senate’s No. 2 Democrat, Sen. Dick Durbin, of Illinois, on Wednesday, before the White House released the proposal, vented that House Republicans have not offered their own budget plan.

Republicans “want to cut spending, but they want to increase defense spending, and many of us have asked for more money for Ukraine, and we certainly are sensitive to the fact that we have to replenish our own supplies in the process,” Durbin said.

“They keep talking in generalities,” he added. “It’s time to establish what they can pass in the House of Representatives.”

Speaking Wednesday before the budget release, the Senate Armed Services Committee’s top Republican, Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi, said any openness to cut defense spending among Republicans is out of step with the majority of the party and suggested McCarthy would buck those views.

“He’s going to make the right decision for the future of our country, and it goes without saying you can’t accommodate two differing positions at one time,” Wicker said. “We are ready to defend our national security interests, and I am getting every signal that this budget will be inadequate and will need to be plussed up.”