Follow us on social

Reps. Lee, Pocan introduce bill that would trim defense budget by $100 billion

Reps. Lee, Pocan introduce bill that would trim defense budget by $100 billion

People over Pentagon Act would represent largest single-year cut in DoD history

North America

Reps Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) and Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) today re-introduced the People over Pentagon Act, a bill that, if approved, would result in the largest single-year DoD budget cut – by $100 billion – in recent memory.

The bill, which was first introduced last June with 22 Democratic co-sponsors, has never been voted on. The two representatives have also offered a number of other bills aimed at trimming defense spending in recent years.  

The Act acknowledges that “many of the most urgent threats to the national security of the United States are not military in nature;” and therefore “the budget of the Department of Defense should be reduced and the associated savings should be reallocated.” The bill also explicitly protects certain provisions in the defense budget, such as the Defense Health Program and military personnel accounts, from cuts, maintaining spending in these programs at the same levels as last fiscal year. 

Instead, the bill will target other areas of massive spending, including funds that go to big arms-manufacturing companies; the current FY 2023 budget alone provides approximately $452 billion to contractors. If passed, the Act could create approximately $1.3 trillion in savings over the next decade, according to 2022 estimates by the Congressional Budget Office. 

“By cutting $100 billion from the defense budget, this bill prioritizes urgent needs like healthcare, education, and infrastructure over padding the pockets of defense contractors,” Pocan said in a statement. “More defense spending does not guarantee safety, but it does guarantee that the military-industrial complex will continue to get richer. We can no longer afford to put these corporate interests over the needs of the American people. It's time to invest in our communities and make meaningful change that reflects our nation’s priorities."

The Pentagon budget continues to grow despite its inability to pass an audit, which it failed for a fifth consecutive time last year. The introduction of this bill comes two weeks after Politico reported that President Joe Biden was preparing to ask Congress for the largest Pentagon budget ever in Fiscal Year 2024. Last December, Congress appropriated $858 billion in national defense funding—$817 billion of which was for the Pentagon – almost $50 billion more than the Biden administration had initially requested and an all-time high in defense spending. The administration’s request for next year  is set to be released on March 9. 

The Act’s co-sponsors call for prioritizing domestic needs over funding weapons systems. “Year after year, this country pours billions into our already-astronomical defense budget without stopping to question whether the additional funding is actually making us safer,” said Lee in a press release. “We know that a large portion of these taxpayer dollars are used to pad the pockets of the military industrial complex, fund outdated technology, or are simply mismanaged.” The Congresswoman further argues that appropriating these funds elsewhere “could do so much good: it could power every household in the US with solar energy; hire one million elementary school teachers amid a worsening teacher shortage; provide free tuition for 2 out of 3 public college students; or cover medical care for 7 million veterans.”


Barbara Lee (Photo: Sheila Fitzgerald via shutterstock.com) and Mark Pocan (Photo: Charles Edward Miller)|Photo: Charles Edward Miller|Barbara Lee (Photo: Sheila Fitzgerald via shutterstock.com) and Mark Pocan (Photo: Charles Edward Miller)
North America
Fort Bragg horrors expose dark underbelly of post-9/11 warfare
Top photo credit: Seth Harp book jacket (Viking press) US special operators/deviant art/creative commons

Fort Bragg horrors expose dark underbelly of post-9/11 warfare

Media

In 2020 and 2021, 109 U.S. soldiers died at Fort Bragg, the largest military base in the country and the central location for the key Special Operations Units in the American military.

Only four of them were on overseas deployments. The others died stateside, mostly of drug overdoses, violence, or suicide. The situation has hardly improved. It was recently revealed that another 51 soldiers died at Fort Bragg in 2023. According to U.S. government data, these represent more military fatalities than have occurred at the hands of enemy forces in any year since 2013.

keep readingShow less
Trump Netanyahu
Top image credit: President Donald Trump hosts a bilateral dinner for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Monday, July 7, 2025, in the Blue Room. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

The case for US Middle East retrenchment has never been clearer

Middle East

Is Israel becoming the new hegemon of the Middle East? The answer to this question is an important one.

Preventing the rise of a rival regional hegemon — a state with a preponderance of military and economic power — in Eurasia has long been a core goal of U.S. foreign policy. During the Cold War, Washington feared Soviet dominion over Europe. Today, U.S. policymakers worry that China’s increasingly capable military will crowd the United States out of Asia’s lucrative economic markets. The United States has also acted repeatedly to prevent close allies in Europe and Asia from becoming military competitors, using promises of U.S. military protection to keep them weak and dependent.

keep readingShow less
United Nations
Top image credit: lev radin / Shutterstock.com

Do we need a treaty on neutrality?

Global Crises

In an era of widespread use of economic sanctions, dual-use technology exports, and hybrid warfare, the boundary between peacetime and wartime has become increasingly blurry. Yet understandings of neutrality remain stuck in the time of trench warfare. An updated conception of neutrality, codified through an international treaty, is necessary for global security.

Neutrality in the 21st century is often whatever a country wants it to be. For some, such as the European neutrals like Switzerland and Ireland, it is compatible with non-U.N. sanctions (such as by the European Union) while for others it is not. Countries in the Global South are also more likely to take a case-by-case approach, such as choosing to not take a stance on a specific conflict and instead call for a peaceful resolution while others believe a moral position does not undermine neutrality.

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.