SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), left, speaks with Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) during a hearing on February 27, 2025 in Washington, D.C.
(Photo: Ricky Carioti/The Washington Post via Getty Images)
After Passage of GOP Medicaid Cuts, Congress Debates Nearly $1 Trillion Military Budget
In a closed-door session last week, senators advanced legislation that would authorize $925 billion in military spending for the coming fiscal year.
Jul 14, 2025
Fresh off the passage of a Republican budget measure that includes more than $1 trillion in cuts to Medicaid over the next decade, Congress this week is set to consider legislation that would authorize close to that same amount for the U.S. military for the coming fiscal year.
The House Armed Services Committee, controlled by Republicans, will mark up its version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) on Tuesday. In a closed-door session late last week, the Senate Armed Services Committee advanced its military spending authorization package, which has a topline of roughly $925 billion for Fiscal Year 2026—an increase of around $30 billion compared to the current fiscal year.
Unlike the GOP reconciliation package that President Donald Trump signed into law earlier this month, the NDAA is likely to clear Congress with bipartisan support. Just one Democrat on the Senate armed services panel—Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)—voted against advancing the legislation out of committee last week.
Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, called the NDAA "a critical, bipartisan measure that ensures our military remains prepared to meet the growing and complex challenges of a dangerous world."
The $925 billion Senate NDAA topline does not include the more than $150 billion Pentagon boost that Republicans inserted in their partisan reconciliation package for fiscal year 2025, pushing the nation's approved military spending above $1 trillion for the year. Trump has openly bragged about his push for a $1 trillion military budget.
"This militarized MAGA agenda harms working families and our communities," Lindsay Koshgarian and Hanna Homestead of the National Priorities Project said following passage of the GOP reconciliation bill. "It will be paid for with cuts to programs that help people meet their basic needs and will disproportionately benefit private contractors, further enrich billionaires, and exacerbate waste, fraud, and abuse of taxpayer dollars."
U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) asked Monday, "How do we always find money for war but never enough money for the children, the poor, and the hungry?"
Breaking Defense noted that the Senate NDAA proposes "an increase of Air Force F-35 procurement from 24 to 34 jets—a sum that, if enacted, would take the [Pentagon's] annual total to 57 jets." Watchdogs have long described the F-35 program as a ridiculous boondoggle.
Lawmakers are set to consider another increase in annual military spending following the release of a report estimating that more than half of the Pentagon's discretionary spending between 2020 and 2024 went to private contractors.
The report, released by the Costs of War Project and the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, notes that "the arms industry has used an array of tools of influence to create an atmosphere where a Pentagon budget that is $1 trillion per year is deemed 'not enough' by some members of Congress." Such tools include lobbying and sizable campaign contributions.
"The vast bulk of the arms industry's campaign contributions go to candidates for Congress," the report observes. "The industry favors incumbents, and concentrates much of its giving to members of the armed services committees and defense appropriations subcommittees in the House and Senate—the members with the strongest role in shaping the Pentagon budget."
This story has been updated to include comment from Rep. Ilhan Omar.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
democratic partymedicaidnational defense authorization actrepublican partyus congressus militarypentagon
Fresh off the passage of a Republican budget measure that includes more than $1 trillion in cuts to Medicaid over the next decade, Congress this week is set to consider legislation that would authorize close to that same amount for the U.S. military for the coming fiscal year.
The House Armed Services Committee, controlled by Republicans, will mark up its version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) on Tuesday. In a closed-door session late last week, the Senate Armed Services Committee advanced its military spending authorization package, which has a topline of roughly $925 billion for Fiscal Year 2026—an increase of around $30 billion compared to the current fiscal year.
Unlike the GOP reconciliation package that President Donald Trump signed into law earlier this month, the NDAA is likely to clear Congress with bipartisan support. Just one Democrat on the Senate armed services panel—Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)—voted against advancing the legislation out of committee last week.
Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, called the NDAA "a critical, bipartisan measure that ensures our military remains prepared to meet the growing and complex challenges of a dangerous world."
The $925 billion Senate NDAA topline does not include the more than $150 billion Pentagon boost that Republicans inserted in their partisan reconciliation package for fiscal year 2025, pushing the nation's approved military spending above $1 trillion for the year. Trump has openly bragged about his push for a $1 trillion military budget.
"This militarized MAGA agenda harms working families and our communities," Lindsay Koshgarian and Hanna Homestead of the National Priorities Project said following passage of the GOP reconciliation bill. "It will be paid for with cuts to programs that help people meet their basic needs and will disproportionately benefit private contractors, further enrich billionaires, and exacerbate waste, fraud, and abuse of taxpayer dollars."
U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) asked Monday, "How do we always find money for war but never enough money for the children, the poor, and the hungry?"
Breaking Defense noted that the Senate NDAA proposes "an increase of Air Force F-35 procurement from 24 to 34 jets—a sum that, if enacted, would take the [Pentagon's] annual total to 57 jets." Watchdogs have long described the F-35 program as a ridiculous boondoggle.
Lawmakers are set to consider another increase in annual military spending following the release of a report estimating that more than half of the Pentagon's discretionary spending between 2020 and 2024 went to private contractors.
The report, released by the Costs of War Project and the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, notes that "the arms industry has used an array of tools of influence to create an atmosphere where a Pentagon budget that is $1 trillion per year is deemed 'not enough' by some members of Congress." Such tools include lobbying and sizable campaign contributions.
"The vast bulk of the arms industry's campaign contributions go to candidates for Congress," the report observes. "The industry favors incumbents, and concentrates much of its giving to members of the armed services committees and defense appropriations subcommittees in the House and Senate—the members with the strongest role in shaping the Pentagon budget."
This story has been updated to include comment from Rep. Ilhan Omar.
Fresh off the passage of a Republican budget measure that includes more than $1 trillion in cuts to Medicaid over the next decade, Congress this week is set to consider legislation that would authorize close to that same amount for the U.S. military for the coming fiscal year.
The House Armed Services Committee, controlled by Republicans, will mark up its version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) on Tuesday. In a closed-door session late last week, the Senate Armed Services Committee advanced its military spending authorization package, which has a topline of roughly $925 billion for Fiscal Year 2026—an increase of around $30 billion compared to the current fiscal year.
Unlike the GOP reconciliation package that President Donald Trump signed into law earlier this month, the NDAA is likely to clear Congress with bipartisan support. Just one Democrat on the Senate armed services panel—Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)—voted against advancing the legislation out of committee last week.
Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, called the NDAA "a critical, bipartisan measure that ensures our military remains prepared to meet the growing and complex challenges of a dangerous world."
The $925 billion Senate NDAA topline does not include the more than $150 billion Pentagon boost that Republicans inserted in their partisan reconciliation package for fiscal year 2025, pushing the nation's approved military spending above $1 trillion for the year. Trump has openly bragged about his push for a $1 trillion military budget.
"This militarized MAGA agenda harms working families and our communities," Lindsay Koshgarian and Hanna Homestead of the National Priorities Project said following passage of the GOP reconciliation bill. "It will be paid for with cuts to programs that help people meet their basic needs and will disproportionately benefit private contractors, further enrich billionaires, and exacerbate waste, fraud, and abuse of taxpayer dollars."
U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) asked Monday, "How do we always find money for war but never enough money for the children, the poor, and the hungry?"
Breaking Defense noted that the Senate NDAA proposes "an increase of Air Force F-35 procurement from 24 to 34 jets—a sum that, if enacted, would take the [Pentagon's] annual total to 57 jets." Watchdogs have long described the F-35 program as a ridiculous boondoggle.
Lawmakers are set to consider another increase in annual military spending following the release of a report estimating that more than half of the Pentagon's discretionary spending between 2020 and 2024 went to private contractors.
The report, released by the Costs of War Project and the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, notes that "the arms industry has used an array of tools of influence to create an atmosphere where a Pentagon budget that is $1 trillion per year is deemed 'not enough' by some members of Congress." Such tools include lobbying and sizable campaign contributions.
"The vast bulk of the arms industry's campaign contributions go to candidates for Congress," the report observes. "The industry favors incumbents, and concentrates much of its giving to members of the armed services committees and defense appropriations subcommittees in the House and Senate—the members with the strongest role in shaping the Pentagon budget."
This story has been updated to include comment from Rep. Ilhan Omar.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.