Obama vs McCain: Threat of presidential veto hangs over 2016 defense authorization act

SGM Matthew Quick — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 07:28:10 -0400

Are President Obama and Senator McCain really fighting for what's best for this country or just re-living their 2008 Presidential Campaigns?

Congress could wrap up a 2016 defense policy bill this week that authorizes pay and benefits for troops, but the Obama administration warned again Wednesday of a veto, according to Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.

McCain, who is heading up negotiations on the National Defense Authorization Act, said he received the most recent veto threat during a phone call with Defense Secretary Ash Carter, who has repeatedly delivered the same message to lawmakers during Capitol Hill testimony.

A veto of the NDAA could drag out the military budget for months and require stopgap bills to keep troops funded. The massive bill is in the crosshairs because the administration wants Congress to lift caps on federal spending created in 2011 to reduce the nation’s debt. Instead of lifting caps, McCain and other defense hawks used a special overseas war fund to sidestep spending limits for defense.

“So, we just have a difference of opinion,” McCain said while speaking at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C. “I am very concerned the president will veto it. It is a great concern to me.”

The authorization act is a key piece of legislation that enables the military to issue paychecks, give raises and provide a raft of benefits. McCain said full details of the bill could be available this week, when a House-Senate conference committee is expected to publish a final version. Congress could vote before its monthlong August recess.

The 2016 NDAA will include a historic overhaul of the military retirement system and steep cuts to headquarters and management staffs, McCain said.

Congress will order a new retirement system that blends the current 20-year pension with a 401(k)-style approach that will increase the number of troops who leave service with retirement benefits from 17 percent to 75 percent, he said.

Read the entire story:
http://www.stripes.com/news/us/threat-of-presidential-veto-hangs-over-2016-defense-authorization-act-1.358055

Response by SCPO David Lockwood made Jul 16 at 2015 7:31 AM

SCPO David Lockwood — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 07:31:58 -0400

The last minute showdown begins. Always messing with the military. Sad.

Response by SGT William Howell made Jul 16 at 2015 7:53 AM

SGT William Howell — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 07:53:54 -0400

I see both sides. We have got to get spending under control, just not sure that messing with National Security is the way to go about it.

Response by LTC John Shaw made Jul 16 at 2015 9:31 AM

LTC John Shaw — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 09:31:03 -0400

SGM Matthew Quick Obama wants more domestic spending, which is the reason for his VETO threat. READ the article "Meanwhile, President Barack Obama has said he will veto any budget bill that does not modify the spending caps mandated by the Budget Control Act of 2011."
I am concerned your write up is misleading people to think Obama is against the changes proposed in the NDAA, he is not.

Response by PO1 John Miller made Jul 16 at 2015 11:23 AM

PO1 John Miller — Thu, 16 Jul 2015 11:23:23 -0400

The part that confuses me is this: both sides want to reduce spending, but "the administration wants Congress to lift caps on federal spending created in 2011 to reduce the nation’s debt. Instead of lifting caps, McCain and other defense hawks used a special overseas war fund to sidestep spending limits for defense."
So both sides want to reduce spending but one side wants to remove caps on federal spending and the other side is sidestepping spending limits? Typical government bureaucracy!!!