Construction
US Senate's Defense Bill: $282M for Ellsworth Air Force Base Construction
2024-12-18
The National Defense Authorization Act passed by the U.S. Senate on Wednesday holds significant implications for Ellsworth Air Force Base near Rapid City. This act includes a substantial $282 million for construction at the base, which is set to prepare it for the arrival of B-21 Raiders, aircraft designed to replace the aging B-1 bombers from the 1970s. By 2030, thousands more military members and their families are expected to arrive at the base, causing its population to grow by approximately 4,000 people, reaching nearly 12,000. The base's commander had previously informed the Black Hills Forum and Press Club about this anticipated growth, which has sparked legislative discussions on how the state can financially support entities like the Douglas School District that serves Ellsworth.

Defense Bill Highlights and Senator Thune's Praise

The $282 million allocated for Ellsworth in Wednesday's defense authorization bill is just a part of the expected $1.5 billion in B-21-related construction at the base. Apart from this construction, there is the cost of procurement. Each of the at least 100 B-21 aircraft the Air Force plans to purchase, to be distributed among Ellsworth and other bases, will cost around $700 million. The bill also includes $2.6 billion for B-21 procurement. In a news release on the legislation, South Dakota Republican John Thune commended the 83-12 vote as a victory for the state. The construction funds will support the building of environmental shelters, a B-21 weapons generation facility, and a B-21 squadron operations center. Thune stated in the news release, "The men and women of Ellsworth Air Force Base carry out a critical mission in service to America's national defense, and South Dakotans have cause to celebrate with this year's National Defense Authorization Act. The B-21 mission will be supported by the authorization of key infrastructure and facilities, and service members everywhere will receive sizable salary increases, particularly junior enlisted members."

Controversial Clause and Senator Baldwin's Dissent

The defense bill contains a controversial clause that prohibits service members from using their military insurance to cover children's "medical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria that could result in sterilization." Wisconsin Democratic Sen. Tammy Baldwin, the Senate's first openly LGBTQ member, voted against the bill and accused Republicans of seeking "cheap political points" by barring gender-affirming care coverage.

Ellsworth's Temporary Move and Representative Johnson's Stance

While the controversial clause drew praise from South Dakota Republican Rep. Dusty Johnson when the bill passed the U.S. House last week. Like Thune, Johnson hailed the bill's support for the B-21 program. His news release on the vote was titled "Johnson Votes to End Woke Policies, Strengthen Military, Get Tough on China." Johnson stated in the release, "Politically 'woke' culture has infiltrated our military, but this bill puts an end to some of those policies like paying for gender transition treatments for youth." He also praised the bill for moving the military away from "promoting critical race theory," preventing military members from being required to use electric vehicles, and authorizing a study on China's use of the Shanghai Shipping Exchange to engage in "unfair trade practices." Johnson had pushed to include the China clause in the defense bill in May.

Senator Rounds and Pay Raises for Service Members

Sen. Mike Rounds, R-South Dakota, called out pay raises for service members in a news release sent over the summer when the Senate Armed Services Committee passed the bill. As a member of the committee, Rounds also supported the bill in the full Senate on Wednesday. He said in the news release, "This year's NDAA includes a 4.5 percent pay raise for our men and women in uniform, as well as back pay for our military members whose promotions were impacted by holds in the Senate. We never want our men and women in uniform entering a fair fight; we always want them to have the advantage."
more stories
See more