Follow us on social

Money

Will Congress force the Pentagon to share the ‘true cost of war’?

Bipartisan organizations are fighting to make sure a House-passed transparency measure isn’t a casualty of a smoke-filled room.

Reporting | Military Industrial Complex

Each year, the Senate and House each pass their own version of the National Defense Authorization Act, one of the few annual “must pass” bills. After going through months of public debate, the dueling versions of the bill are brought to the proverbial smoke-filled rooms of Capitol Hill, where top lawmakers quietly trade pet projects and hammer out the text that will reach the president’s desk.

Last year, one provision that never made it out of those smoke-filled rooms was an amendment, sponsored by Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.) and passed by the House, that would have forced the Pentagon to disclose the full cost of America’s “pointillist empire” of overseas bases. 

This time around, activists are fighting to make sure that won’t happen again. “This amendment is crucial as taxpayers and other citizens remain concerned — and inadequately informed — about the cost to U.S. taxpayers of the wide range of U.S. military activities abroad,” wrote a broad group of activist organizations and research centers in an open letter to congressional leadership.

The letter’s signatories include the Friends Committee on National Legislation, R Street Institute, Just Foreign Policy, the Project on Government Oversight, Taxpayers for Common Sense, and the Quincy Institute, which publishes Responsible Statecraft.

The Bowman amendment, if maintained in the final bill, would build on previous efforts to increase transparency of Pentagon spending by forcing the Department of Defense to publicly share data on the cost of all of the military’s overseas operations. This would mean more transparency about the price tag of training dozens of foreign militaries, maintaining hundreds of bases, and carrying out a range of covert and drone operations, among other things.

“The American people deserve to know the true cost of war,” Bowman said in a statement.

The open letter comes amid a sharp increase in military spending, which is slated to reach $886 billion next year. Pentagon outlays now make up roughly half of the federal government’s entire discretionary budget. Meanwhile, some lawmakers are pushing for an emergency bill to add extra military funding while domestic spending is restricted by caps.

“Many Americans want greater public scrutiny and debate about the balance our nation strikes between spending on our military presence abroad and spending on other domestic priorities,” the open letter argues. “These debates will only become more relevant as our military budget approaches the $1 trillion mark.”

“[W]e urge you to do everything within your power to ensure that Rep. Bowman’s common sense, non-controversial, House-passed amendment is maintained in the final version of the NDAA,” the groups wrote.


(phanurak rubpol/shutterstock)
Reporting | Military Industrial Complex
Trump Vance Rubio
Top image credit: President Donald Trump meets with Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Vice President JD Vance before a call with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Monday, August 18, 2025, in the Oval Office. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

The roots of Trump's wars on terror trace back to 9/11

Global Crises

The U.S. military recently launched a plainly illegal strike on a small civilian Venezuelan boat that President Trump claims was a successful hit on “narcoterrorists.” Vice President JD Vance responded to allegations that the strike was a war crime by saying, “I don’t give a shit what you call it,” insisting this was the “highest and best use of the military.”

This is only the latest troubling development in the Trump administration’s attempt to repurpose “War on Terror” mechanisms to use the military against cartels and to expedite his much vaunted mass deportation campaign, which he says is necessary because of an "invasion" at the border.

keep readingShow less
US Navy Arctic
Top photo credit: Cmdr. Raymond Miller, commanding officer of the Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Bainbridge (DDG 96), looks out from the bridge wing as the ship operates with Royal Norwegian replenishment oiler HNoMS Maud (A-530) off the northern coast of Norway in the Norwegian Sea above the Arctic Circle, Aug. 27, 2025. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 3rd Class Cesar Licona)

The rising US-NATO-Russia security dilemma in the Arctic

North America

An ongoing Great Power tit-for-tat in which U.S./NATO and Russian warships and planes approach each other’s territories in the Arctic, suggests a sense of growing instability in the region.

This uptick in military activities risks the development of a security dilemma: one state or group of states increasing their security presence or capabilities creates insecurity in other states, prompting them to respond similarly.

keep readingShow less
President Trump with reporters
Top photo credit: President Donald Trump speaks with members of the media at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland on Sunday, September 7, 2025. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

Is Israel forcing Trump to be the capitulator in chief?

Middle East

President Donald Trump told reporters outside a Washington restaurant Tuesday evening that he is deeply displeased with Israel’s bombardment of Qatar, a close U.S. partner in the Persian Gulf that, at Washington’s request, has hosted Hamas’s political leadership since 2012.

“I am not thrilled about it. I am not thrilled about the whole situation,” Trump said, denying that Israel had given him advance notice. “I was very unhappy about it, very unhappy about every aspect of it,” he continued. “We’ve got to get the hostages back. But I was very unhappy with the way that went down.”

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.