To protect its prerogative of adding billions of dollars of pork-barrel projects to defense bills, the Senate on Wednesday passed its fiscal 2009 defense authorization bill without allowing votes on 101 amendments, some of them important to service personnel. About a third of the amendments would have improved military quality of life or the management of service personnel programs.

But one amendment, introduced by South Carolina Republican Sen. Jim DeMint, would have given the Department of Defense the authority to ignore up to $5 billion of “earmarks” found not in the bill but buried in the measure’s thick report.

Senators decided to abandon all remaining amendments rather than face an embarrassing election-year rhubarb over pork-barrel spending.

Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., chairman of the armed service committee and floor manager of the bill, said DeMint’s amendment would have been “an abdication of the power of the purse” in shaping defense policy bills.

Key personnel initiatives left for the next Congress to take up included:

EARLY RESERVE RETIREMENT – This amendment from Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., would have made more than 140,000 reservists who’ve been mobilized since Sept. 11, 2001, eligible for earlier reserve retirement.

Last year, Congress adopted a pared down Chambliss amendment on reserve retirement. It lowered the age-60 start for retired pay of Reserve and National Guard members who mobilize for war or national emergencies.

For every 90 consecutive days mobilized, reservists would see retired pay begin three months earlier, if they otherwise qualify for retirement. So a reservist who was mobilized a total of 24 months to Iraq or Afghanistan could begin to draw retired pay at age 58.

“CONCURRENT RECEIPT” – Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., had introduced amendments to expand “concurrent receipt” concerning military retirees who now have their retired pay reduced by amounts received as disability compensation from the Department of Veterans Affairs.

One Reid amendment would have accelerated phased restoration of full annuities for retirees with disability ratings of 50 to 90 percent. If this change were adopted, the retired-pay offset for these retirees would have been eliminated at the end of this month rather than by Dec. 31, 2013.

The other Reid amendment would have extended concurrent receipt to noncombat disabled retirees with 15 or more years of service.

LEAVE FOR DEPLOYED MEMBERS – An amendment from Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., would have directed that rest and recuperation leave for deployed service members not count toward their 30-day annual leave limit.

MILITARY VOTER HELP – Amendments from Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, would have eased the hassle of voting for service members by allowing voter registration during change-of-station moves and by modifying procedures for collection and delivery of absentee ballots from members overseas.

Other amendments the Senate declined to consider would have enhanced separation allowance; extended federal employment preferences and work credits to military spouses; allowed stillborn children to be treated as insurable dependents under Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance; increased the ceiling on tuition assistance; and reimbursed for family travel when service members need treatment for serious mental disorders.

It can’t be assumed that the full Congress would have adopted any of these amendments if voted by the Senate. Reid’s concurrent receipt provisions, for example, carry hefty costs and would have had difficulty surviving a House-Senate conference committee that will meet to negotiate differences between the two bills. But now none of the provisions will be in the mix during deliberations with the House.

Senate passage of its defense bill with few amendments doesn’t put at risk those amendments already adopted. The most important one for 57,000 military widows, voted last week, would eliminate an offset in survivor benefits for widows drawing VA Dependency and Indemnity Compensation.

The Senate’s defense bill also has many other provisions to benefit military members – including a 3.9 percent pay raise next January and the authority to allow up to three weeks’ paternity leave to military fathers. The House bill supports the pay raise but is silent on paternity leave.

DeMint’s showdown over earmarks was sparked by an executive order President Bush signed last January to reduce wasteful spending. It said departments could withhold spending on budget items not specifically found in bills signed into law but contained in nonstatutory reports on bills.

Democrats sought to get around that order, DeMint said, by adding language to the defense bill that “each funding table” found in the bill’s report is “incorporated” in the bill itself, thus protecting earmarks from department “merit” reviews demanded by the executive order.

DeMint’s amendment sought to remove that language, found in Section 1002 of the defense bill (S. 3001), so that defense officials could decide “not to spend money on projects … not needed to defend our country.”

The vote to pass the defense bill without further amendments was 88-8.

To reach military columnist Tom Philpott, e-mail milupdate@aol.com or write to Military Update, PO Box 231111, Centreville, VA, 20120-1111.