Some Republicans in Congress had already floated the idea of passing a major new tax and spending bill before the midterm elections. Now, it may be the only way for the Pentagon to get more military funding.
WASHINGTON – For weeks, speculation has been mounting on Capitol Hill about a second “big, beautiful bill” as some Republican lawmakers push for major new legislative reforms ahead of a midterm cycle in which they could lose full control of Congress.
The talks are starting to get more serious, with lawmakers acknowledging it may be the only way to pass up to $200 billion in additional defense spending for the escalating war with Iran.
But the path to winning war funding in Congress is likely to be tough, as Republicans cannot afford to lose a few votes, if any, in the already tight margins in the House and Senate. It also risks splintering the Republican Party, which is trying to project a unified party message as the November election approaches.
While the politics surrounding Pentagon funding are complex, the legislative process is relatively simple. A simple majority vote in the Senate is all that is needed to pass massive tax and spending legislation through a process known as “reconciliation.”
That’s how the so-called “big, beautiful bill” — a behemoth that cut Medicaid, eliminated the tax on tips, and overhauled student loans — was signed into law last year. Virtually everything else would require 60 votes, which would require Democratic support.
Both strategies have advantages and disadvantages. In theory, calculations for adjustments are easier. Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), a hardline conservative, said it was a “better approach” than venturing into territory where he would need to lobby Democrats for votes.
He acknowledged that the bill could balloon quickly, complicating its feasibility before it reaches President Donald Trump’s desk.
“Obviously, there are a lot of questions that come with that in terms of what happens and what we do,” Roy told USA TODAY. “There are issues related to taxation and health care policy. Once we start down the path of reconciliation, everything begins to open up.”
Another potential reconciliation push was a hot topic of discussion at the recent House Republicans’ annual policy roundtable in Doral, Florida. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-Louisiana) told visiting reporters that another similar mega-building would be “not as big, but just as beautiful.”
A number of ideas were floated during lawmakers’ trip to the Sunshine State, but neither Republicans nor Democrats are yet fully sure what might end up in another settlement.
“Who knows?” Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, told USA TODAY.
She argued that Republicans “just continue to confront the government’s practices and circumvent the process.”
MAGA, Senate Division
Two key Republican constituencies on Capitol Hill are already threatening the success of another reconciliation bill.
First, at least one anti-interventionist conservative is not happy with the prospect of spending more money to support conflicts overseas rather than solving problems at home.
“I’m tired of spending money on the industrial complex,” Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.), an avid MAGA believer, told reporters last week. “There are people in Colorado who can’t afford to live there.”
Some realists in the Senate are also hesitant to fully support such a plan. Some Republicans, including Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, an ally of President Trump, have already said they are “open” to approving war spending through settlements, but others do not want to participate yet.
“Without context, there’s no way to know what’s actually in there and the likelihood of it actually going anywhere,” Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) told USA TODAY.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), who was a key vote on the “Big Beautiful Bill” last year, has become increasingly skeptical of the war effort. She specifically calls on the Trump administration to increase communication with lawmakers before considering approving additional Pentagon cash.
The White House “must make information available upon request,” she said. “Don’t take for granted that the role of Congress is basically just writing checks.”
Zachary Schermele is a Congressional reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach me by email at zschermele@usatoday.com. Follow him on X at @ZachSchermele and on Bluesky at @zachschermele.bsky.social..
