The House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee (HAC-D) on Thursday advanced its $826.5 billion fiscal year 2024 spending bill, while the panel’s top Democrat said it likely won’t become law with the current GOP-proposed policies in the legislation.
The bill, released on Wednesday and then marked up in a closed session, did not contain full spending details or where program cuts were made, while the GOP-led subcommittee did cite provisions to block climate change and Diversity, Equity and Inclusion-related programs as well as prohibiting the use of funds to assist those seeking abortion-related services.
“This bill rejects many of the Biden administration’s misguided funding proposals, such as climate change initiatives, far-left social policies, and shrinking the Navy. I ensured this bill provides significant oversight of the Department’s request, resulting in approximately $20 billion in cuts that I have redirected to improve the lethality and readiness of the force,” Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Calif.), the HAC-D chair, said in a statement following the markup.
Rep. Kay Granger (R-Texas), the House’s top appropriator, said she’s “looking forward to it moving through the process,” as the bill now heads to the full committee for consideration.
“As we face growing threats around the world, we must provide the men and women of our military with the tools they need to defend our nation. The FY24 Defense bill demonstrates that the United States is serious about investing in our capabilities; we will continue to support our allies; and we are prepared to meet and defeat our enemies,” Granger said in a statement.
However, Rep. Betty McCollum (D-Minn.), the HAC-D ranking member, said that in her 16 years as an appropriator she had “never seen such shocking and extreme policy riders” included in a spending bill, and noted her view that it’s unlikely to garner bipartisan support moving forward.
“I will have more to say about these and other provisions during the full committee markup. But it is very clear that all these divisive riders must come out, or this bill will not gain the bipartisan support necessary to become law,” McCollum said at the markup, according to a copy of her remarks. “Regrettably at this time, I will be unable to vote for passage of this bill. And I cannot recommend to my colleagues that they support it. But I do look forward to working with you in a bipartisan fashion over the coming months to get a bill that secures our national defense, and that all of us can support.”
Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) on Thursday cited the bill’s $1.1 billion cut to salaries for civilian personnel at the Pentagon and $1.9 billion reduction to the administration’s budget request for multi-year procurements.
“The bill put forth contains a laundry list of partisan proposals and talking points from the most extreme wing of your party. This legislation would harm our readiness, undermine morale, and fails to support our men and women in the armed services,” DeLauro said.
Everett Kelly, national president of the American Federation of Government Employees, released a statement on Thursday citing concern with the over $1 billion cut to civilian personnel at the department.
“The indiscriminate spending cuts and personnel restrictions proposed in this bill would weaken our military readiness and threaten national security while doing nothing to rein in out-of-control price gouging by military contractors,” Kelley said. “Civilian employees are critical to our military defense and actually should be taking on more responsibilities, not less, to free up our service members to focus on their war-fighting duties.”