WASHINGTON \u2014 The U.S. House on Wednesday took up a defense appropriations bill that proposes tens of billion of dollars in new spending for the Pentagon. The problem is it breaks budget caps set in law.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The House\u2019s version of 2018 defense appropriations legislation includes added ships, jets and potentially $28.6 billion in flexible funding for emerging requirements. At $584.2 billion, with $73.9 billion overseas contingency operations, or OCO, it would exceed 2018 budget caps for defense by $63.5 billion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Some lawmakers fear that with no clear path from GOP leaders to adhere to or lift the budget caps, it\u2019s unclear whether Congress is headed toward sequestration budget cuts triggered when the caps are broken or some other scenario that would damage defense.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cIt\u2019s headed toward a colossal crackup,\u201d House Armed Services Committee ranking member Adam Smith, D-Wash., said Wednesday. \u201cUnderstand that the legislation they have put forth is the most craven piece of legislation I have witnessed in 20 years.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Smith, who has been railing against what he sees as defense budget dysfunction, ripped \u201chypocritical\u201d House Republicans who want to be both pro-defense and fiscally conservative.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThey are passing a bill that will be null and void in order to both say, \u2018I didn\u2019t vote to lift the caps, and I did vote for more defense spending,\u2019\u201d Smith said. \u201cThis is an enormous waste of time, all because they don\u2019t want to honestly address the issue. Which of these things are ultimately going to give?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The House has taken up defense appropriations packaged in a four-bill, $790 billion \u201csecurity bus\u201d that also includes spending bills for energy and water, the legislative branch, military construction and Veterans Affairs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Democrats have voiced opposition to the legislative vehicle, arguing it short-circuits debate on domestic priorities as well as its likely inclusion of funding for a border wall. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
The 2011 Budget Control Act caps the Pentagon base budget, Department of Energy nuclear spending and other defense-related spending combined at $549 billion for fiscal 2018.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The president\u2019s budget request, at $603 billion, exceeds the caps by $54 billion; and the House and Senate defense appropriations committees exceed them by $63.5 billion and $1.8 billion, respectively.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Although the annual National Defense Authorization Act, as a policy bill, is not subject to budget caps, the versions passed by the House and Senate armed services committees exceed the caps by $71.9 billion and $90.7 billion, respectively.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Pro-defense lawmakers have argued the president\u2019s budget request is not enough. Texas Republican Rep. Kay Granger, who chairs the House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee, nodded to a warning from Defense Secretary Jim Mattis to Congress that the military will lose its edge without consistent funding.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cWe must keep this funding intact,\u201d Granger said on the House floor on Wednesday. \u201cWe need to heed secretary Mattis\u2019s warning and give our military what it needs, no less. This is not a partisan issue.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
House Armed Services Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee Chairman Mike Turner, R-Ohio, and other lawmakers have pressed House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., for a vote to repeal budget caps for defense alone. On Wednesday, Turner said the effort was active and that GOP leaders \u201care just looking for the votes.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cWe\u2019re trying to give them all the assurances that we can that the votes are there,\u201d Turner said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
House Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee Chair Rob Wittman, R-Va., said defense authorizers and appropriators are pressuring House GOP leaders to significantly plus-up defense, \u201cone way or another.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cIt\u2019s up to leadership to negotiate it, but the message has come pretty strongly from appropriators and authorizers that this is where we need to be,\u201d said Wittman. \u201cBecause of [budget caps] and the impact it\u2019s had on readiness and the devolution of readiness, we find ourselves in this position.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
To lift or ease the caps would also require the support of Democrats, who have demanded defense increases be matched in the nondefense side of the budget. That, in turn, would cost support from GOP fiscal conservatives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Congress has in recent years used OCO, which is exempt from the caps as a wartime fund, as a relief valve for spending unrelated to war. But lawmakers have expressed concerns that White House budget director Mick Mulvaney, a deficit hawk during his time in Congress, may use his authority to block miscategorized defense spending.<\/p>\n\n\n\n