WASHINGTON. As Republicans in the US House of Representatives debate what to cut federal spending in their fight against Democrats over the debt ceiling, a handful of Texans are making it clear: don’t mess with the military.
Republicans have largely used the debt ceiling as a tool to negotiate federal spending cuts with the Biden administration, but opinions differ on where to cut the fat.
Some, including Texans who have long defended military spending, argue that Congress should not touch defense funding, while others say all funding other than benefits should be on the negotiating table. This is an uncertainty that the Republicans can hardly afford with only six votes in the House of Representatives.
Texas Republicans have played a central role in debt ceiling discussions within their party. US Representatives Michael McCall, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and Kay Granger, chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, are both prominent defense hawks who oppose cuts to any military spending.
Meanwhile, Rep. Jody Arrington, chairman of the House Budget Committee, and Chip Roy, member of the Freedom Caucus, are poised to scorch the ground to balance the country’s ledgers. Roy has gained new influence in his party after a tumultuous election for Speaker of the House of Representatives this year created a shaky balance of power.
The stakes are high. Last month, the Biden administration urged Congress to quickly raise the debt ceiling to pay interest on its debts and fund federal programs already approved by Congress. Failure to do so could mean a country defaulting on its debt – something it has never done before – and seriously undermining confidence in the country’s economy and assets.
Both sides agree that this will be a disaster for the entire world. The federal government is projected to run out of money this summer, after which Congress will be forced to raise the national debt ceiling to avoid extreme measures.
“I think it’s fair to say that this is the most serious debt ceiling situation since 2011,” said Rep. Brendan Boyle, Democrat of Pennsylvania, the top Democrat on the House Budget Committee.
Defense spending has risen steadily under both Democratic, Republican, and Congressional presidency. Last year’s federal spending bill included a 10 percent increase in defense spending, a rise that Republican conference defense hawks like McCall and Granger argue is necessary amid growing threats from China, Russia and Iran. The bill included about $45 billion in aid to Ukraine and NATO in an attempt to prevent further Russian aggression.
But a vocal handful of far-right Republicans at the conference are skeptical about allocating more money to defend Ukraine. They argue that protecting the US’s southern border should be a higher priority. This is a point of view that McCall calls dangerous.
“If Ukraine falls, President Xi in China is going to invade Taiwan,” McCall told CNN. “They talk about the border – not at all mutually exclusive. We can do both. We are a great country.”
It took months of negotiations to pass last year’s spending package for the federal government, with high potential for collapse before the close of Congress. The uncertainty has led to fears at the Defense Department that it will not be able to plan its financial program as Russia threatened to escalate the war in Ukraine, and defense spending advocates do not want a repeat.
Granger’s committee determines how much money should go to individual state programs, and while she opposed the spending bill because of its high spending on non-defense priorities, the Fort Worth Republican is a major proponent of defense spending, including manufacturing in its North Texas County Roy. said he would prefer to maintain or even increase defense spending in the next budget process, but he does not rule out cutting defense spending to balance the nation’s books. When asked if there is still a need to cut defense spending, he said: “You have to figure out how to do it.”
Roy also voted against a $40.1 billion aid package for Ukraine last May, shortly after Russia’s February invasion of Ukraine, although his main objection to the bill was the manner in which it was thrown into the hall, preventing MPs from studying and discuss it before accepting it. was put to the vote. He also expressed concern about the lack of revenue streams to fund the bill, which means another increase in public debt.
Roy told The Texas Tribune that he personally would prefer to reduce all discretionary spending, except defense spending, to pre-pandemic levels. It will not cover mandatory spending on programs such as Medicare and Social Security. It would be politically fraught for Republican voters, many of whom rely on social spending benefits.
But that leaves few options for cuts, and Democrats have made it clear that the kinds of cuts Republicans are pushing for on non-defense programs are not starter cuts.
