A significant increase in Pentagon spending is being proposed by the leaders of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees. The legislation would add $150 billion to the defense budget, with a substantial portion—$25 billion—allocated to the new Golden Dome missile defense initiative. This brings the total defense spending for fiscal year 2025 to over $1 trillion when combined with the already approved budget.
“Our defense industrial base has weakened. America’s deterrence is failing and without a generational investment in our national defense, we will lose the ability to defeat our adversaries,” said House Armed Services Committee Chairman Rep. Mike Rogers (R., Ala.). The Golden Dome initiative, authorized by a White House executive order, is designed to create a robust defense against ballistic, hypersonic, and advanced cruise missiles. Approximately $15 billion of the allocated funds for Golden Dome will go towards satellites, space-based sensors, interceptors, and launch infrastructure.
The funding will be processed through a budget reconciliation bill, enabling its passage without the risk of a Senate filibuster. The House Armed Services Committee will debate and mark up the bill on April 29. “This legislation represents a generational upgrade for our nation’s defense capabilities, including historic investments in new technology,” noted Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Sen. Roger Wicker.
The legislation prioritizes eleven key areas, including shipbuilding, munitions production, and initiatives to improve military readiness and quality of life. Funding is set to commence immediately upon bill enactment. “The House and Senate Armed Services Committees developed this legislation in close conjunction with the White House to modernize America’s military, secure the border, and strengthen national security,” stated the chairmen.
However, Rep. Adam Smith (D., Wash.), the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, expressed strong opposition. He criticized the reconciliation approach, citing potential negative impacts on social programs. “While there may be bipartisan support for investing in defense spending that supports the quality of life of our service members and their families, readiness, innovation, and modernization, these investments should be considered through the normal authorization and appropriations process,” Rep. Smith stated on April 27. He described the legislation as a “partisan budget reconciliation gimmick” that would necessitate offsetting cuts to social safety net programs.