McConnell, Collins on collision course with Democrats over spending parity

Senate Republicans are on the verge of clashing with Democrats who insist that non-defense spending programs be treated the same as defense programs.

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said he would not accept Democrats’ request to give non-defense programs the same increase ($1 in increments) as defense programs, saying they have higher priorities. He said he should think about it.

McConnell said last week that the dollar-for-dollar equality of increases in defense and non-defense spending is “totally unacceptable.”

“We have two major competitors, Russia and China. We have the Iranians and their proxies. We are currently in the most dangerous period since the fall of the Berlin Wall, and defense spending is We need to reflect our nation’s needs, and we are clearly opposed to setting an arbitrary line on how much defense spending we should spend on the country.

“So I certainly don’t agree with that. We’re going to have a vigorous discussion about it,” he said.

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), vice chair of the Appropriations Committee, sided with McConnell.

“Given how underfunded we are in defense spending and the global threats we face, I don’t think parity is possible,” she said.

McConnell and Collins are pushing back on Democrats’ demands for parity after Senate Appropriations Chairwoman Patty Murray (D-Wash.) pushed for parallel increases in non-defense and defense programs. .

“For me, today and every day until the funding bill is passed, the word of the day will be ‘equity,’ which means that despite fiscal responsibility laws, my Republican colleagues will “When I argue that we need more defense spending, I will also advocate for increased domestic investment to match the increased defense spending,” Murray said earlier. this month.

The Democratic chairman of the Appropriations Committee acknowledged that “this year is tough from a resource standpoint,” but called for “bipartisan cooperation” to pass the bill by the end of the year.

Other Democrats are rallying behind Murray’s call to increase non-defense programs as much as national security priorities.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), a prominent progressive, said, “Equality agreements have been part of keeping Congress functioning for years.”

“Due to supplementary budgets and various accounting complexities, military budgets often produce better results than non-military budgets,” she said.

Democrats point to the $95 billion national security spending package that President Biden signed into law last month, which includes significant new defense spending.

Warren dismissed the idea advanced by some Republicans that defense spending is more important to the national interest than social programs.

“It’s essential that we keep our roads and bridges in good condition. It’s essential that our children have access to health care. We’re essential to running this country. America has been in basic condition for decades. “We lack investment in infrastructure, and we pay the price every time our commutes take longer and goods and services don’t get to where they’re supposed to go,” she said.

“The idea that only some spending is essential is fundamentally wrong,” she says.

But Mr. Murray’s call for national defense and non-defense priorities to rise in tandem with each other has not found support among Republicans.

“That’s BS,” said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), who is running to replace Mr. McConnell as Senate Republican leader at the end of the year.

“We just appropriated $95 billion for essentially what we need for national defense,” he said, referring to the recently enacted defense aid spending package.

“The idea that we’re going to continue to take on more and more debt to increase domestic spending at a time when the threat is this serious and serious is just ridiculous. It’s going to be a big fight,” Cornyn said.

He predicted that Democrats’ demands to equalize increases in defense and non-defense spending would be a “big problem.”

Democrats argue that funding for some critical national security programs comes from the non-defense side of the book, including programs under the Department of Homeland Security and funding for domestic semiconductor manufacturing.

Republicans and Democrats on the Senate Appropriations Committee were largely on the same page last year on passing annual spending bills.

That’s because the two countries agreed a year ago to increase defense spending by 3.3% while adhering to maximum spending targets set by the Fiscal Responsibility Act, which effectively freezes non-defense spending.

Twelve annual spending bills passed Senate committees with overwhelming bipartisan support, but the most controversial spending bill funding the Department of Homeland Security lost just a few votes. was.

Under the Fiscal Responsibility Act, both non-defense and defense spending levels are required to increase by 1% in fiscal 2025.

But Republicans, including McConnell, and some Democrats, including Sen. Jon Tester of Montena, have suggested that a 1% increase in defense spending won’t be enough to keep up with threats from Russia, China and Iran. ing.

“On defense, a 1% increase is just not enough for the situation we’re dealing with,” Defense Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Tester told The Hill on Thursday.

Collins said Democrats’ demands will likely make passing the fiscal year 2025 spending bill even more difficult.

“I hope they don’t insist on that because it would destroy the bipartisan nature of the bill that we’ve been able to achieve so far,” she said.

The Senate Appropriations Committee also faces a standoff with the new chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.). The congressman on Thursday announced a 6% cut in non-defense programs and a 1% spending target. Percentage increase in defense power.

Mr. Murray issued a statement criticizing House Republicans’ spending targets for falling short of the non-defense program levels that then-Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) agreed to with Mr. Biden last year.

“As we craft the bill in the Senate, we intend to include all the resources House Republicans and the president agreed to last year. Anything less would mean devastating cuts that hurt families and set this country back. “Let’s not repeat the mistakes of last year, which only led to months of confusion and delays,” she warned.