Follow us on social

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

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)
Analysis | Reporting | North America
Latin America's hidden role in shaping US foreign policy
Top image credit: President Getulio Vargas of Brazil confers with President Franklin D. Roosevelt at a conference aboard a U.S. destroyer in the Potengi River harbor at Natal, January 1943 (via US LIBRARY OF CONGRESS)

Latin America's hidden role in shaping US foreign policy

Latin America

For much of the Washington D.C. foreign policy apparatus, Latin America — a region plagued by economic instability, political upheaval, and social calamity — represents little more than a headache or an after-thought.

Not for Greg Grandin.

keep readingShow less
US Navy Red Sea Houthis
The USS Carney intercepts Houthi missiles in the Red Sea on Oct. 19, 2023. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Aaron Lau/ Public domain)

US missile depletion from Houthi, Israel conflicts may shock you

Military Industrial Complex

Historic levels of air defense missiles were expended by U.S. Navy ships in the Middle East in defense of Israel and in protection of Red Sea shipping since October of 2023. This led Admiral James Kilby, Naval Operations acting chief, to testify in June that their ship-launched air defense interceptors — SM-3s — are being expended at an “alarming rate” in defense of Israel.

But just how alarmed should we really be?

keep readingShow less
Hiroshima
Top image credit: Dennis MacDonald / Shutterstock.com

Symposium: Why was Japan the only nuclear holocaust in 80 yrs?

Global Crises

Eighty years ago today, August 6, 1945, the U.S. military dropped an atomic weapon nicknamed “Little Boy” on the city Hiroshima, Japan, resulting in a blast equivalent of 15 kilotons of TNT, killing approximately 66,000 people immediately and some 100,000 more, the vast majority civilians, by the end of 1945.

Three days later, the U.S. deployed another nuclear bomb — this one “Fat Man” — on the Japanese city of Nagasaki, leaving upwards of 80,000 people dead by the end of the year.

keep readingShow less

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.