Follow us on social

google cta
2023-01-06t021337z_1082062106_mt1sipa000qf7fr5_rtrmadp_3_sipa-usa-scaled

McCarthy weighing $75B defense budget cut in quest for speakership (update)

Reportedly, part of the deal with Republican detractors would be capping entire federal budget to 2022 levels.

Analysis | Reporting | North America
google cta
google cta

UPDATE, 1/7, 9:30 a.m. ET: Rep. Kevin McCarthy obtained the required number of votes to become House Speaker last night. His concessions to the holdout Republicans reportedly include demands that any raising of the debt ceiling be accompanied by budget cuts, though it is not clear, yet, what those rule changes might be or whether they would affect defense spending. The Washington Post and other outlets are reporting that McCarthy will allow more Freedom Caucus members — who would be averse to lifting the debt ceiling without cuts — to be seated on the powerful Rules Committee.


After days of negotiations, Rep. Kevin McCarthy is considering cutting the Pentagon budget by $75 billion in order to gain the support of roughly two dozen Republicans who have opposed his bid to become speaker of the House, according to Bloomberg

The cut is reportedly part of an “emerging deal” that would cap government spending at 2022 levels, meaning that it would return defense spending to $782 billion — a sharp drop from this year’s allotment of $857 billion.

According to Andrew Lautz, Director of Federal Policy at National Taxpayers Union and regular RS contributor, this could end up being a bigger cut than people think.

“I would argue the cut would be larger than $75 billion. That's a $75 billion cut relative to FY 2023 levels. CBO is not out with their new baseline yet but I imagine they're now projecting a larger than $857 billion national defense topline for FY 2024,” Lautz wrote in an email after this story broke. “Relative to that new expectation, a $782 billion flat FY 2024 topline might be closer to an $100 billion cut."

If any deal does go through, it would still represent one of the largest single-year reductions in the Pentagon’s budget in history. But that is, of course, a big “if.” It remains unclear whether the agreement will be enough to end days of battles in the House over who will serve as speaker, and it’s far from certain that McCarthy will have the power to ensure that such dramatic cuts are actually enacted. 

The proposal could earn support from some progressives in Congress, including Reps. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) and Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), who pitched a $100 billion haircut for the Department of Defense earlier this year. But it will no doubt face serious headwinds from more hawkish members of Congress, especially given that this year’s Pentagon budget boost easily passed both the House and Senate, and progressives are unlikely to go along with the idea of across-the-board budget cuts.

One of the biggest questions surrounding the deal will be its potential impact on U.S. aid to Ukraine. Several of the Republican holdouts, including Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), have strongly opposed the assistance, and McCarthy himself famously quipped late last year that American help should not amount to a “blank check.”

Regardless of the outcome, the proposed deal highlights a significant shift in Republican politics that has taken place in recent years. As Bill Hartung of the Quincy Institute told RS, GOP lawmakers often “gave the Pentagon a pass when they talked about curbing ‘big government,’” but many Freedom Caucus members now seem determined to cut the military down to size.


Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., walks back to his office after the House adjourned until tomorrow after five additional ballots today fell short of the necessary numbers to confirm his nomination for speakership on the third day of the 118th Congress at the US Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Thursday, January 05, 2023. (Photo by Craig Hudson/Sipa USA)
google cta
Analysis | Reporting | North America
nuclear weapons testing
A mushroom cloud expands over the Bikini Atoll during a U.S. nuclear weapons test in 1946. (Shutterstock/ Everett Collection)

Nuke treaty loss a 'colossal' failure that could lead to nuclear arms race

Global Crises

On February 13th, 2025, President Trump said something few expected to hear. He said, “There's no reason for us to be building brand-new nuclear weapons. We already have so many. . . You could destroy the world 50 times over, 100 times over. And here we are building new nuclear weapons . . . We’re all spending a lot of money that we could be spending on other things that are actually, hopefully, much more productive.”

I could not agree more with that statement. But with today’s expiration of the New START Treaty, we face the very real possibility of a new nuclear arms race — something that, to my knowledge, neither the President, Vice President, nor any other senior U.S. official has meaningfully discussed.

keep readingShow less
Witkoff Kushner Trump
Top image credit: U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff looks on during a meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, at Trump's Mar-a-Lago club in Palm Beach, Florida, U.S., December 29, 2025. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

As US-Iran talks resume, will Israel play spoiler (again)?

Middle East

This Friday, the latest chapter in the long, fraught history of U.S.-Iran negotiations will take place in Oman. Iran’s foreign minister Abbas Araghchi and President Trump’s Special Envoy Steve Witkoff will meet in an effort to stave off a war between the U.S. and Iran.

The negotiations were originally planned as a multilateral forum in Istanbul, with an array of regional Arab and Muslim countries present, apart from the U.S. and Iran — Turkey, Qatar, Oman, and Saudi Arabia.

keep readingShow less
Trump Putin
Top image credit: Miss.Cabal/shutterstock.com

Last treaty curbing US, Russia nuclear weapons has collapsed

Global Crises

The end of the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), the last treaty between the U.S. and Russia placing limits on their respective nuclear arsenals, may not make an arms race inevitable. There is still potential for pragmatic diplomacy.

Both sides can adhere to the basic limits even as they modernize their arsenals. They can bring back some of the risk-reduction measures that stabilized their relationship for years. And they can reengage diplomatically with each other to craft new agreements. The alternative — unconstrained nuclear competition — is dangerous, expensive, and deeply unpopular with most Americans.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.