The unusual coalition of conservative Republican deficit hawks and liberal Democrats united to cut Pentagon spending is worrying defense supporters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
House Budget Committee Ranking Member Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., and Freedom Caucus Leader Rep. Mick Mulvaney, R-S.C., joined forces to block a Veterans Affairs and Military Construction appropriations bill. Their target is the overseas contingency operations (OCO) account that House and Senate GOP leaders have increased from $50 billion to $88 billion to raise Pentagon funding without breaking spending caps.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Van Hollen and Mulvaney oppose the increase, arguing it has nothing to do with combat costs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Even Defense Secretary Ash Carter opposes dealing with spending caps via an inflated OCO.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For some, this political odd couple has renewed hope of a new budget deal like the compromise crafted by Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., and Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., which provided limited relief from defense and domestic spending caps.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Van Hollen-Mulvaney alliance will cause headaches for Republican and Democratic leaders who want to pass a budget to show voters Washington can still get things done. That could provide the boost that brings both parties to the negotiating table this fall on a “Ryan-Murray II” deal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Or it could scuttle the possibility of any deal at all. Van Hollen wants either all caps lifted or none at all, while Mulvaney wants caps to stay in place. Together, these factions could prove a dangerous majority.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Another option: boost defense and domestic spending. That would cost $58 billion this year, a fraction of total government spending, allowing both sides to start budget talks with a clean slate.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The unusual coalition of conservative Republican deficit hawks and liberal Democrats united to cut Pentagon spending is worrying defense supporters.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":7,"featured_media":28956,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_yoast_wpseo_meta-robots-noindex":"","_yoast_wpseo_meta-robots-nofollow":"","_yoast_wpseo_canonical":"","_acf":"","_yoast_wpseo_primary_category":68,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","_smg_distribution_targets":[]},"categories":[66,33,68,17],"tags":[],"coauthors":[1929],"class_list":["post-35642","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-commentary","category-home","category-intercepts","category-opinion"],"acf":{"subheadline":"","legacy_arc_id":"QWQIK4OGOFFF5ENBSGF54DLX3U","arc_canonical_url":"\/opinion\/intercepts\/2015\/05\/06\/editorial-of-budgets-and-odd-alliances\/","remove_feature_photo":false,"is_sponsored":false,"subtype":"","redirect_url":"","disable_inline_ads":false,"native_logo_pretext":"Presented By:"},"yoast_head":"\n