Republicans Push Back on Trump Admin's Possible Military Spending Plan

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: Newsweek

Published Dec 10, 2025 at 11:19 AM EST


The Trump administration's push to raise defense spending, and potentially through a reconciliation bill, is stirring concern among some Republicans, including Senator Lisa Murkowski. The Alaska Republican's communications team referred Newsweek to her Tuesday comments to reporters, stating, “A reconciliation bill is not how we ensure defense spending going forward. That’s what we do in appropriations.”

Why It Matters

Reconciliation is a fast-track budget process that allows the Senate to pass certain spending bills with a simple majority, avoiding the 60-vote threshold that would require several Democrats to join Republicans, given the chamber's balance of power. Earlier this year, lawmakers used reconciliation to approve a one-time defense funding boost of more than $150 billion. The process is used for increases and mandatory spending and revenue changes, not the annual Pentagon budget, which is set through appropriations and the yearly Defense Department funding bills.

Over the weekend, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said last year’s reconciliation bill to boost defense spending is “only just the beginning,” noting that defense spending will increase and likely increase further through reconciliation. The U.S. national defense budget totaled more than $890 billion in 2025, the Center for Strategic and International Studies reported.

What To Know

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Russ Vought said over the weekend that the White House is not opposed to considering a second budget reconciliation bill this year to advance defense funding.

Read more: https://www.newsweek.com/republicans-push-back-trump-admin-military-spending-plan-11187529

[IronLionZion]

1. Invading Venezuela and annexing Greenland isn't cheap

especially if they want to take Canada too.

[Sneederbunk]

3. Don't forget Panama.

[IronLionZion]

7. Great, seems like we've seen something similar around 90 years ago. The whole world was involved.

but we better stop teaching history in schools.

[angrychair]

2. How long before they circumvent

Congress all together? This Congress is utterly spineless and unequivocally broken. This administration is also no longer hiding that they didn't give a shit what the law says if they want to move money around they will, if they want to cancel whole government agencies, they will. Their distain for Congress is overt and undeniable. Unless it immediately drops to its knees and says "whatever you want Daddy" they are attacked.

I genuinely believe we are less than 6 months away from the WH just going directly to Treasury for whatever money they want and ignoring Congress all together.

If I have learned anything it's that the Executive can just ignore the courts and Congress and their is genuinely morning they can do about it. The enforcement mechanism is not owned by the courts or Congress.

[BumRushDaShow]

4. "How long before they circumvent Congress all together"

They already HAVE. Multiple times, by refusing to spend the money authorized BY CONGRESS via appropriations that were SIGNED INTO LAW by a President, for SPECIFIC PURPOSES, and instead impounding it and/or withholding it until the end of the FY, where the money drops back into the Treasury unspent (except on something that 45 wants it spent on by illegally "reprogramming" it).

IOW, they have violated both the "Budget Control and Impoundment Act" AND the "Antideficiency Act" and no on cares.

[angrychair]

5. Absolutely agree Bum

I meant in a more wholesale and overt way.
Right now they are, to certain degrees, still following the court rulings and still pretending to go through the Congressional appropriations process. I believe they will even abandon this facade and essentially leave Congress and the courts, impotent. You can see it starting. His last couple of EOs have sounded more like him making "laws" than EOs. They go far beyond directives to executive agencies and increasingly have more direct impact on citizens, in a way people are not accustom.

[BumRushDaShow]

6. He did the "E.O. as legislation" crap during his first term

and most were either thrown out (including by the SCOTUS) or had to be revised.

This time he has had a rock-solid loon SCOTUS that has allowed the carnage to continue before even hearing and ruling on the merits, and that is what is concerning.

[angrychair]

8. Absolutely

Without those six assholes a lot of this would be a lot harder but I would still argue at the end of the day it wouldn't matter if all nine of them were Democrats if they cannot enforce their ruling because the various federal police forces are all controlled by him or he could just issue blanket pardons for anyone that needs it on the fly.

I think what is missed here is that, based on our current structure, it was always possible for any president to do what he is doing, the only thing required is to be president and to have totalitarian rule over that executive branch, specifically the DOJ.
As long as that is true, what Congress or the courts do or say becomes irrelevant because they cannot enforce any actions on the president and they can just pardon whoever he wants to stop others from being arrested.
Our entire system of government works on the assumption that the president is an honorable person but if they are not, all bets are off. They could literally do almost anything.