Who is Deputy Editor and Senior Pentagon correspondent for defense news here with us to talk about the efforts to pass the Defense Authorization bill. Aaron, the bill sets programs and policies for the pentagon. How important is it for pentagon operations and for the funding that those programs require . So the national Defense Authorization act, essentially, its the defense policy bill. This is seen on the hill and its one of the mustpass bills and this is how much well pay members of the military and this is how many plane, how many ships and how many guns were going to buy and this is how we want to invest and it can include policy, and regarding some movements in some cases and overseas exercises and things like that. It is very much the bill that sets the next year of the military and in some cases the next five years of the military planning. It is seen in the pent fwon as something they need to get done every year and it is done as a point of pride they get done every year and it is backed each year by the congressional leadership. This year it might get tricky and well see what happens and this is a bill that at the end of the day members of congress will come together and make sure it gets through. The house and senate versions, how far apart are they . Theres differences, of course. We just went through the conferencing process. So essentially now theres one version now and the two sides have come together and made their agreements. As you would expect, the Republican Senate and a democratically controlled house there were definitely issues of contention and they should be able to smooth those out and they basically came together in the fall and were very clearly saying, we know that with the election, this is too politically challenging and too politically charged to get through some of these issues that we have to work through right now. They kicked it until after the election and two weeks of conferencing and now we have an agreement. The defense bill is snagged in trumps war on social media protections. This is this section 230 that the president s tweeted about. Whats the president calling for . It threatened a veto over the bill. Whats it about . This is the second veto threat that trump made about the policy bill. It was about the changing of names for confederate generals. He first threatened to veto that over the summer when it was being discussed. The most recent thing, the section 230 thing came out of nowhere for the defense bill. Its something thats been talked about for a while by the president and this is the circle of people and essentially, section 230, and it allows at the most basic social Media Companies and Internet Companies are not liable by users of the product. So someone on twitter comes out and says im going to do x crime, twitter is not liable for that. Its the person who set it on twitter liable. Theres been angst that this is allowing bias speech and theres been talk about going after it, and people that are more expert in this, look, if this got repealed, the president s tweets themselves would probably be liable for legal action. That said, the one thing that seems to be in agreement across the hill is this is no place in the defense bill especially because trump tried to force it in in the last couple of days as the bill was on both sides. You saw jim inhofe who is the Senate Arms Service chairman and a close ally of President Trump and talks to him frequently and said i want to repeal section 230. I think we have to get it done. I support the president on this and this is not the place to do it, and thats something that weve seen with the authorization act in the past is the sense that, look, you dont want to load it up, and people try to load it up with stuff. The defense committees always spend a lot of time trying to fight that off and trying to keep it purely as defense focused as possible. Both republicans and democrats agree, this is not the place for section 230 and well have to see now if the president follows through on his veto threat. The language there on the confederate monuments and excuse me, the confederate naming bases after confederate generals. What does the final language in the bill say . So we dont know for sure because we have not seen the final language out. They just finished the conference officially yesterday and they always like to delay it to make our lives miserable. It looks like based on reporting that weve seen, it will be a situation where the army is given a threeyear period to come up with alternative names and the army will have a final say the final say in terms of what the names actually look like. Thats different from some language that democrats and theyll rename them all. The other wrinkle here is in theory, joe biden would issue an executive order and why are the democrats still pushing these confederate base names and why not just kick it to the Biden Administration, but i think this is a sense of congress wanting to put its foot down, again, in both chambers and both partys way essentially saying, you know what . It is time to change these names and we have other alternatives and well do it through a slower process instead of an executive akd. Our guest, aaron meadows, Deputy Editor and Senior Pentagon correspondent for defense news. We welcome your calls and comments, 2027488001 for republicans. Democrats, its 2027488000, and if you are active and retired military, that line for you is 2027488003. Yesterday the chair and Ranking Member of the Senate Arms Services committee, adam smith and thornberry released a statement saying that for 59 straight years the ndaa has pass said because members of congress and president s of both parties have set aside their policy objectives and partisan preferences and put the needs of our military personnel and america security first. The time has come to do that again. Given that its the very end of the 116th congress, is this late in the day for this bill typically to pass . You know, its not ideal, but not atypical. Weve seen a lot of up to the wire ndaas in the past. Lets be honest. Over the years youve seen a lot of funding bills pass on the appropriations side and it looks like it will be that situation again. The ndaa is something that the members takes great pride in saying the military is an apolitical institution and the National Security of the United States of america is the goal. We can work our issues out and come together at the end of the day and make this happen. Max thornberry who is the Ranking Member of the house Arms Services committee is retiring this year. He certainly was want going to be the first ndaa that doesnt get through on his last time going through it. The other leaders on these committees, they understand this, too. It is one of the areas on the hill with the most agreement and most bipartisanship in the sense that yes, they fight about these policies and yes, there are disagreements and at the end of the day theyll come together and make sure it comes through . You mentioned this is the defense bill setting the policy for the defense and the coming and the current fiscal year in the 2021 the 2021 fiscal year budget. So what amount of funding does this authorize . So this authorizes about 740. 5 billion and thats with a b because of course when we talk about the pentagon it is also a b, for defense spending and thats 720 for the pentagon itself and other agencies get parts of that, and its things like troop levels and pay raise and members of the military and the details of how many f45 fighters do you buy . How many ships do you buy . Its kind of the allencompassing defense standard bill. It is one of the legacies of the Trump Administration is the establishment of space force. How much money does this bill authorize for space force and what other policy changes are included in the bill regarding space force. Well have to see the final numbers and we expect it will increase and the path that you expected with space force. They started to add more people in, and graduating classes are going from the air force academy into space force for the first time. So youre seeing as people come in and the force grows, its budget is also going to increase. In terms of policy things, its still a lot of reorganization. With the military, there are space offices kind of everywhere. Every service, they had their own version of space and inside, typically the air force there are different space offices kind of scattered about. A big thing that space force will be doing for the next couple of years and you are seeing through things in the ndaa is essentially saying there are offices over here and why not bring them into space force and maybe they need to be two offices in the space force, and where do we shift the money and its a lot of bureaucracy, and one thing when you talk to people who are dealing with this is they understood the ridiculous bureaucracy thats going into standing up into military service. I think thats what we will see the ndaa Going Forward in the next couple of years with the military. Justin amash tweeted this about the Defense Authorization bill. He says President Trump should just veto the ndaa not just for the nonsensical reasons he cites. She should oppose funding, and detention of americans without charge or trial ask corporate welfare for the military Industrial Complex and yet he hasnt vetoed a single ndaa. If he does, if the president were to veto this and he leaves office, what does that mean . Well, it sets up a couple of interesting things. First off, my colleague joe gould, and the chairman last night and smith said he thinks trump would be foolish if he tried to veto it because there are the votes in his mind, there are the votes from both republicans and democrats and both chambers to be able to pass the bills as a veto override and that would be an embarrassment for the president. If he vetoes it then they have to go back and try to rework something with the new administration. My gut level on this, frankly, is the president , if hes seeking the repeal of 230, there are other legislative ways to do that and there are other bills that are coming up. The fact that both Speaker Pelosi and leader mcconnell have agreed to bring the ndaa to a vote is a big sign because mcconnell is famous for not bringing things to an actual vote if he doesnt think it will pass or there is a real threat. It isnt likely that the president would veto this particular bill and the republicans would get the 230 repeal elsewhere. That said, if there was one thing weve learned over the last four years is the president prides itself with unpredictability and well see what happens in the next couple of weeks. Line for military, retired and active military is 2027488003 and joe in fayetteville, south carolina. Good morning, joe. Good morning. I just find that this is a politicization of something that has not been politicized before, just like theyve been politicizing the judiciary and several other things thats never been up for a vote before. What do you think about this, sir . I think the question of politicization in the military has kind of been an issue throughout the Trump Administration raised by experts and particularly those who study the military affairs. Remember, the military is a civiliancontrolled organization and there are issues and okay, are civilian, many of whom are in acting capacity, nonconfirmed at capacity and are they being railroaded by the white house or inside the building by the officials. I think one of the things that you will see whoever the next secretary of defense is and we can get into that, if you like and there will be an e for the to assert civilian control and up to the white house and reasserting it should not be used as props and the president should not sign a policy bill not related to the military. We saw with the lafayette bill situation in june, there is a lot of blowback with mark esper saying the military shouldnt have been there. Both of them said that was a mistake and we regret that. Thats an issue that certainly the next administration will take on in some form. You mentioned the next secretary of state might pike. Who are the candidates . Many of us thought that it was basically a lock for michelle floornoy, former secretary of defense for policy was seen as the clearcut choice for Hillary Clintons secretary of defense in 2016, and is a wellrespected person by republicans and democrats. Very liked by both parties and very well respected in both buildings, as well. In the last couple of weeks a couple of names have floated out. Jeh johnson former head for president obama and former counsel at the pentagon ask it was the lead internally there for repealing the dont ask, dont tell policies and his name has floated up as a top tier contender and the other name that came out last week is the retired army general and former head of u. S. Central command for 2013 to 2016 and the interesting thing with off the sin that he would require just as secretary mattis did a waiver because if you are a former general and you are active within the last seven years, which he was, you require a waiver from both the house and the senate. Full majority from those chambers to make that happen. Thats a tricky proposition given the current makeup and republicans who mae not want to throw the new administration a bone and democrats who say why are we putting another general in for those . And also because we want to get out of wars in the middle east which he essentially ran. So it will be interesting to see where this goes. Apparently, biden is doing interviews this week on some of this and the thought is he will announce soon. It is very traditional for the secretary of defense to be in place immediately after the inauguration. The congress will hold a hearing beforehand and get them cleared and essentially wait to pass the vote until the president is inaugurated and the senate goes back in and has its vote and the secretary of defense within hour the president being inaugurated is working. It is hard to see the waiver fight happening this quickly especially given the georgia political runoff where no one knows what it will look like until early january. It could get dicey and tune into defensenews. Com for more on that. We have profiles of fluornoy and other candidates already. It will be for the first time not a white man who is rung tni the pentagon. Carol is next up in minneapolis. Welcome. Good morning. Yes, i was hearing on the news last night that President Trump before he is leaving is really hollowing out the pentagon as much as he can and putting Young Political a poims including t a including the isis task force and are they doing this to take away the information that the Biden Administration could be getting from these personnel and just to make it more difficult for biden . Thank you. So, yes, immediately after the election there was a significant waive, and the most clearcut one was secretary mark esper who was fired and the undersecretary of policy, James Anderson and Joseph Kernen who was a tier below the secretary of defense were also forced out along with parts of their staff and replaced by people who were seen as trump loyalists. One is named ezra cohen wattnick at the Security Council very early and another is taba who had been placed in the pentagon after he couldnt get a confirmation by republicans in the senate for the policy job. He is now in charge of the policy job in acting capacity and the secretary of defenses chief of staff was replaced by cash patel who is a devin nunes aide and a republican attack dog on the russia probe. These are people who are very loyal to the president and theyre not afraid of that either. They are very loyal to the president. The president is the commander in chief. He has the right to fire and hire as he wishes among the political appoint sees. These political appointees are also going to be gone come january 20th and the question people are concerned about is called burrowing which is a situation where political appointees are given nonpolitical jobs and hence are harder to fire. That happened in the Obama Administration and the clinton administrations and there is a theory that the Trump Administration is doing it more than others. I havent seen the numbers to back that up and it is something people are tracking. Just broadly speaking, we put up a story last week where we did the numbers. 40 of the Pentagon Senate confirmable jobs are currently filled by performing the duties of a technical difference and they theyre aking officials. Thats not ideal because when you are an acting official you dont have the full authority that the confirmed person is, also, it doesnt have as much juice in the building with a giant bureaucracy. Sometimes youre want able to advocate for your office the way you should. That is a highly unusual number. 40 of 60 not being phil confirmed by people and the senate. Theyve struggled getting nominees in particularly to the pentagon. Just in terms of being slow to send the names of the senate and getting through. Inhofe, the Senate Arms Service committee multiple times has told reportes, i want to confirm these guys and the president said hell nominate this person and three months later he still has not sent paperwork. What am i supposed to do . This has been building for a while. Its hard to fill some of the spots and you will not see new people coming in right now. So this is just the situation that were in. Lets hear from darryl on our military line in fayetteville, north carolina. Darryl, good morning. Hey, how are you doing . What i think our country needs is the draft, and what that draft does is it promotes people with no other draft. And its two people in a fox hole and theyll do one of