I finished reading the entire H.R.1540, also known as the:

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012. 

Now as I read I can see maybe a few places where people could get confused and angry about…but to be completely honest logically this is a pretty basic bill that I can’t see any reason for anyone to truly be upset. It was almost like reading a inventory guide saying what we will and will not repurchase for this coming year, in certain areas. Others of restrictions and how we are or are not to be getting paid for certain works…which only applies of one is in the military. 

Basic Summary over the entire bill: To authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2012 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes.


Sections which really caught my eye:

(Sec. 351)

Authorizes the adoption of a military working dog by the family of a deceased or seriously-wounded member of the Armed Forces (member) who was the dog’s handler.

My comment on this? Really…what is it people don’t like about this? On a less obvious note, I understand that if people are reading the bill, this is most definitely not one that is upsetting anyone.  

(Sec. 515) Authority to order Army Reserve, Navy Reserve, Marine Corps Reserve, and Air Force Reserve to active duty to provide assistance in response to a major disaster or emergency. (I like very much)

(Sec. 516) Authority for order to active duty of units of the Selected Reserve for preplanned missions in support of the combatant commands. (mixed feelings)

Sec. 533. Department of Defense suicide prevention program.

Sec. 546 ^^^ above is also part of this section it seems.

(a) Program Enhancement- The Secretary of Defense shall take appropriate actions to enhance the suicide prevention program of the Department of Defense through the provision of suicide prevention information and resources to members of the Armed Forces from their initial enlistment or appointment through their final retirement or separation.

(b) was deleted?

(c) Limitation on Number Admitted Using Waiver- Not more than five candidates may be admitted to each of the military service academies for an academic year pursuant to a waiver granted under this section.

Sec. 541. Reform of offenses relating to rape, sexual assault, and other sexual misconduct under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
 Ok, section 541, was about 3-4 pages just to get rid of any chance of loopholes in a court of law and defined what rape is considered in the military. Which from what I read seemed pretty cut and dry.

SEC. 544. FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE OF MILITARY CHAPLAINS WITH RESPECT TO THE PERFORMANCE OF MARRIAGES.

Comments

Permalink

                        A military chaplain who, as a matter of conscience or moral principle, does not wish to perform a marriage may not be required to do so.

^ What’s not to like about that?

Sec. 556. Reserve component mental health student stipend.

^ I read this one and was confused by the wording, so proceeded to read the entire section. In a nutshell it is basically saying that for the military to give a stipend to someone going to school, through the military, for psychology or social work, to receive this particular stipend it must be assumed that they WILL complete the training and that they already have something set up to work in this field in the military upon their graduation.

Late 900 sections-

SUBTITLE F—OTHER MATTERS

                        Sec. 951. Activities to improve multilateral, bilateral, and regional cooperation regarding cybersecurity.

Sec.

952. Report on United States Special Operations Command structure.


Sec.

953. Strategy to acquire capabilities to detect previously unknown cyber attacks.

Sec.

 954. Military activities in cyberspace.

Cyber space protection is really to prevent hackers and nothing more.

SUBTITLE C—NAVAL VESSELS AND SHIPYARDS-
^ Self explanatory 

So, after reading the entire bill I must state what I have observed: I believe full heartedly that those who disagree so strongly with this bill honestly haven’t read it. Because other than people saying it “stomps on our rights,” which in all honesty I have seen no real evidence for, just a false sense of inductive reasoning on their part, it seems like there’s really not much to disagree with. It all seems to be budgeting through the armed forces, which form what I read seems rather balanced. Though I did read a couple passages that may or may not have a place for real discussion, and I can see how someone could get upset over, I really don’t see any rights being violated at all. Do your homework America! Read before you judge this book by it’s cover.