Latest news with #HouseAppropriationsCommittee
Yahoo
a day ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Opinion - Congress can't just hand over the checkbook to the executive branch
At a recent House Appropriations Committee markup, something happened that should alarm every American, especially those who believe in accountability. I introduced a simple amendment. All it said was that Congress, not the president, decides how taxpayer money is spent. That is not a radical idea. It is in the Constitution. It is our job. So I asked my Republican colleagues: Are we a co-equal branch of government? Do we still control how money gets spent? Their answer was no. They voted against the amendment. Just imagine that. Members of Congress voting to give up the very job they were elected to do. The Appropriations Committee exists to decide how your tax dollars are used. That has been the job of Congress since the beginning of the republic. It is written into Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution. Since 1974, federal law has made it even clearer. Congress decides where the money goes. Not the president. Not unelected officials. Congress. Past presidents, even when they disagreed with Congress, recognized that spending decisions had to come from lawmakers. They did not always like it, but they respected it. What we are seeing now is different. President Trump's team is saying they can simply cancel funding that Congress already approved. That is new. That is dangerous. That is illegal. That is why I offered the amendment. It was not a stunt. It was not partisan. It was a reminder of what we were sent here to do. If Congress does not stand up now, we may never get this responsibility back. We manage $2 trillion a year. If we do not do our jobs, someone else will. And that someone will not be elected or accountable to the people. So I ask my Republican colleagues. What are you afraid of? When you vote to give up your job, you are not just weakening Congress. You are letting down the roughly 750,000 people you swore to represent. And for what? Political loyalty? Fear? I think about the generations of lawmakers who served on the House Appropriations Committee. Republicans and Democrats alike understood the weight of their responsibility. They did not walk away from it. They defended it. That is what I am doing now. Because this is not about party. It is about whether the House of Representatives still represents the people. Or whether we have become irrelevant. We must remember our role before it's too late. Mike Levin represents California's 49th Congressional District in the U.S. House of Representatives. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
a day ago
- Politics
- The Hill
Congress can't just hand over the checkbook to the executive branch
At a recent House Appropriations Committee markup, something happened that should alarm every American, especially those who believe in accountability. I introduced a simple amendment. All it said was that Congress, not the president, decides how taxpayer money is spent. That is not a radical idea. It is in the Constitution. It is our job. So I asked my Republican colleagues: Are we a co-equal branch of government? Do we still control how money gets spent? Their answer was no. They voted against the amendment. Just imagine that. Members of Congress voting to give up the very job they were elected to do. The Appropriations Committee exists to decide how your tax dollars are used. That has been the job of Congress since the beginning of the republic. It is written into Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution. Since 1974, federal law has made it even clearer. Congress decides where the money goes. Not the president. Not unelected officials. Congress. Past presidents, even when they disagreed with Congress, recognized that spending decisions had to come from lawmakers. They did not always like it, but they respected it. What we are seeing now is different. President Trump's team is saying they can simply cancel funding that Congress already approved. That is new. That is dangerous. That is illegal. That is why I offered the amendment. It was not a stunt. It was not partisan. It was a reminder of what we were sent here to do. If Congress does not stand up now, we may never get this responsibility back. We manage $2 trillion a year. If we do not do our jobs, someone else will. And that someone will not be elected or accountable to the people. So I ask my Republican colleagues. What are you afraid of? When you vote to give up your job, you are not just weakening Congress. You are letting down the roughly 750,000 people you swore to represent. And for what? Political loyalty? Fear? I think about the generations of lawmakers who served on the House Appropriations Committee. Republicans and Democrats alike understood the weight of their responsibility. They did not walk away from it. They defended it. That is what I am doing now. Because this is not about party. It is about whether the House of Representatives still represents the people. Or whether we have become irrelevant. We must remember our role before it's too late. Mike Levin represents California's 49th Congressional District in the U.S. House of Representatives.
Yahoo
13-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Military bill neglects Hawaii's needs, Case says
U.S. Rep. Ed Case is blasting military appropriation legislation that is moving through the House of Representatives as 'shortchanging ' priorities critical to Hawaii, including environmental cleanup and military infrastructure. On Wednesday, members of the House Appropriations Committee voted to advance legislation that calls for over $450 billion to fund military construction, the Department of Veterans Affairs and other programs for fiscal 2026. The bill is the first of the 12 annual funding measures House GOP appropriators are hoping to move out of committee before Congress leaves for its August recess. But the bill advanced along party lines, with Republican lawmakers touting it as a major win and Democrats lambasting what they say are major shortcomings and omissions from the bill. Case, a Hawaii Democrat, said in a statement after the vote that 'while the measure does have positive provisions including funding for essential veterans programs, I regrettably had to vote against it because it kicks critical military infrastructure projects down the road yet again, pursues the Project 2025 goal of privatizing VA medical care, shortchanges dedicated funding for Per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS ) cleanup, eliminates climate resiliency efforts and excludes important VA infrastructure funding.' Last year's version of the bill allocated $1.55 billion, roughly 8 %, of the worldwide military construction budget to Hawaii, but this year, no money was allocated for Hawaii. The islands are home to U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, which oversees all U.S. military operations across the Pacific and much of Asia. Pentagon leaders say the region is their top priority theater of operations amid tensions with China. 'We have an obligation to ensure our veterans get the benefits and care that they have earned, ' said U.S. Rep. John Carter, the Republican chair of the subcommittee on military construction and VA funding. 'This bill does that while also addressing other critical issues affecting veterans including homelessness, mental health services, and taking care of our women veterans. The bill also makes critical investments totaling nearly $18 billion in the infrastructure our service members need to work and live. The Committee will continue to prioritize INDOPACOM and quality of life investments in Fiscal Year 2026.' In response to Carter's remarks, Case told lawmakers, 'with great respect, I have to disagree with that because I do not see the evidence that the Indo-Pacific is in any way, shape or form, prioritized in this particular bill, ' noting that the bill only included funding for a single military construction project in the region—$50 million for a military access road in Guam. Case argued that would leave upgrades to strategic naval yards, airfields and other facilities unfunded across the Pacific as the U.S. and Chinese militaries eye each other's capabilities. When it comes to projects in Hawaii, Case told lawmakers, 'I hope and believe we would all agree that Hawaii has a place to play in all of this at this point, and yet, there's no (military construction funds ) on for Hawaii.' He emphasized that no money was put aside under the Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program to make upgrades to the Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard, a critical maintenance point for warships and submarines. Lately, the Navy had been pouring money into the construction of a new dry dock there to support new nuclear submarines. The project is considered the most expensive single construction in the service's history. Dry Dock 5 is expected to be complete in 2028 and cost a total of at least $3.4 billion. 'There's no funding to make sure that our shipyards can continue to serve us in this capacity, ' Case told fellow lawmakers. 'There is a (Congressional Budget Office ) report that calls for billions and billions and billions of deferred maintenance and other construction right in Hawaii, including, for example, of Kaneohe Bay Marine Base at $1.1 billion, Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam at $1 billion, and I could go on down the list.' Case also accused the GOP of ignoring the threat of climate change. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has declared that the military is done with 'climate crap, ' which he insists is a political fairy tale that has distracted commanders and troops from training for war and obtaining new weapons, and promised during his confirmation hearing that he would fire senior Pentagon officials if they began talking about climate change. Military planners have been worried about the effects of sea level rise and intensifying storms on its bases, especially in the Pacific. A Pentagon study in 2018, during President Donald Trump's first term, found that nearly half of all U.S. military sites were threatened by weather linked to climate change. But following the resignation of then-Defense Secretary James Mattis, the administration dismantled the Navy's climate change task force, which had started under the Obama administration and which Mattis had kept running. When Joe Biden entered the White House in 2021, the program restarted. But the second Trump administration has taken an even harder line on climate programs. In April, Navy Secretary John Phelan announced on social media platform X, 'I'm focusing on warfighters first and I'm rescinding the Biden administration's climate action program.' Case told fellow lawmakers that 'there is the problem of a continued reluctance, a continued closing of their eyes by the Defense Department, of anything that smacks of any kind of base resilience, because they don't want to talk about the effects of the weather on our basing. Therefore things get zeroed out that the military knows that we need, and this is simply the wrong way to take a look at this. We are shortchanging this critical strategy in our (military construction ), and we've got to correct this before it is literally too late.' However, though ultimately voting against the bill, Case managed to secure $634 million for the Energy Resiliency and Conservation Investment Program, which funds projects that save energy and water use in support of military operations to cut costs and improve efficiency in the long term. The bill also called for several reviews and reports on military infrastructure needs at bases in Hawaii and around the Pacific that Case pushed for, including aging water infrastructure around Pearl Harbor. VA provisions expansive The portions of the bill dedicated to the VA included provisions that maintain contracting preferences for Native Hawaiian-owned businesses that work with the VA ; $1.5 million for a pilot project to use new technology to help identify the remains of unknown service members buried at the National Memorial Cemetery of the Pacific ; $342 million for rural health initiatives ; $233 million for substance-use disorder treatment plans for veterans and a hefty $3.4 billion to address veteran homelessness. It also includes $1.3 billion to support female veterans and support the VA's Office of Women's Health, including its child care initiative. As more women have served in the military in recent decades, record numbers are now claiming the benefits they've earned and presenting new challenges to the VA. 'Women veterans often require specialized care due to unique health needs stemming from their military service and gender, ' said Case. 'With sustained support from my Committee over multiple years, Congress is working to ensure the VA set the standard for women veterans care, ensuring consistent, high-quality services across all facilities.' In Hawaii veterans are served by the VA's Pacific Island Health Care System, which also serves vets in the U.S. territories of Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands and American Samoa—giving it an area of responsibility of approximately 2.6 million square miles. The system has few dedicated facilities of its own, with some of its operations at Tripler Army Medical Center. It largely relies on partnerships and contracts with other hospitals and clinics across the Pacific's far-flung islands to provide for patients. The bill includes language calling on formal plans to expand coverage to veterans living in the 'freely associated ' Pacific island nations of Palau, the Federated States of Micronesia and Marshall Islands—all of which have traditionally high enlistment rates. The measure also includes language calling for continued support and operations for the VA Center for Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander and United States-affiliated Pacific Islander Veterans. The center's doctors and scientists do research across the U.S. and Pacific islands and regularly work with the University of Hawaii. The bill calls on the VA to continue partnering with universities in Hawaii and across the Pacific to support island veterans. The current version of the bill includes funding for the VA on paper, but Case's office in a statement charged that it also 'specifically advances the privatization of veterans health care by proposing vastly larger increases for medical care provided in private sector compared to short-funding the government's VA health care system, a key goal of the Project 2025 plan being followed by the Trump administration.'
Yahoo
12-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Rep. Lauren Boebert seeking $5m in federal funds to remove ‘toxic black sludge' from drinking water in tiny Colorado community
Colorado Republican Rep. Lauren Boebert visited a small community in Morgan County, in the eastern part of her state, promising to address a long-standing issue that has left locals with 'toxic black sludge' in place of clean drinking water. Boebert this week toured the Prairie View Ranch Water District, which lies 50 miles north of Denver, and told the residents: 'This is something that certainly needs to be addressed. I'm sorry it's been ignored for two decades. 'This is something that should upset and appall every single Coloradan.' To remedy the situation, she has pledged to ask the House Appropriations Committee for a $5 million grant to help overhaul the local water supply. Her request will be put before the committee later this month and, if it is approved, will then likely be folded into a larger appropriations bill that would have to pass through the House of Representatives and Senate before reaching President Donald Trump's desk for signing off. Boebert's office believes that could happen before the end of September, according to CBS News. Boebert has been notable in recent months over her outspoken support for Trump and Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which has slashed federal budgets in a bid to reduce 'waste' expenditure and fraud. The Independent has reached out to Boebert's office for further comment. The water crisis in eastern Colorado has been in the making for almost 20 years, with the area's 150 residents saying they have been repeatedly let down by the people elected to protect them and left with houses that are worthless without reliable water. CBS reports that the Morgan County Board of County Commissioners allowed the district to be run as a for-profit private company for 16 years, a period during which the Colorado Division of Housing allegedly failed to stop unscrupulous developers from using an unregistered installer, using false credentials and faked signatures, to assemble houses and infrastructure on the cheap. The network adds that the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment's Water Quality Control Division failed to act for a decade after learning that the homes had been erected without valid state approval or proper regulatory oversight, resulting in contaminated water and widespread discontent. 'We have systems. We have policies. We have regulations that should never allow this, and it went by blind eyes and deaf ears,' resident Sam Belmonte told CBS. He challenged Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, a gubernatorial candidate, to follow Boebert's example and said he found her visit 'invigorating' after years of feeling ignored. 'It gave us some sense of hope that Congresswoman Boebert actually came,' Belmonte said. The representative left the site with a sample of the water, which she said she hopes to use to present to the House committee to persuade its members to hand over the funding. 'I'm happy to be here doing this but the state of Colorado should have stepped in years and years ago,' she said. 'Every Coloradan, every American, every person deserves clean drinking water. This is unacceptable.'
Yahoo
11-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
US Congress seeks to boost Navy and Air Force fleets in 2026 bill
By Mike Stone WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The House Appropriations Committee's Defense subcommittee released its draft bill for fiscal-year 2026 late on Tuesday, which aims to buy one additional F-35 jet versus the Pentagon's 2025 budget request and make investments in naval vessels, and missile defenses. The powerful committee's draft of its version of the 2026 purchasing bill was released ahead of any formal input from the Trump administration's Pentagon - which has been delayed. The language in the bill shows the Republican-controlled Congress' continued focus on modernizing the U.S. armed forces but sets up a tug of war with the Pentagon over what could be conflicting priorities. The bill, which still needs input from the full House and Senate, directs the Pentagon to buy 69 Lockheed Martin F-35 fighters for $8.5 billion, 15 Boeing KC-46 aerial refueling tankers for $2.7 billion, and three F-15EX aircraft for $345 million as well as $3.8 billion in funding for Northrop Grumman's B-21 stealth bomber program. The Pentagon's 2026 budget request, which has not been released, requests 47 F-35s, according to media reports. The Navy's non-fighter aviation procurement includes four E-2D Advanced Hawkeye aircraft for $1.2 billion and 19 CH-53K heavy transport helicopters for $2 billion. The bill also emphasizes missile defense, with approximately $13 billion to Missile Defense Agency and the Space Force program's support of the "Golden Dome" initiative. This money would be above the approximately $25 billion that Congress has earmarked for Golden Dome in its reconciliation bill. The committee's draft bill would also give military personnel a 3.8% increase in basic pay, effective January 1, 2026. The bill directs the Pentagon to procure 28 naval vessels, including two Virginia-class submarines made by General Dynamics at $6.2 billion. The Columbia-class submarine program would receive $5.3 billion. Both programs have additional funding for advance procurement underscoring the strategic importance of the United States' underwater fleet. Surface fleet additions would include two DDG-51 destroyers, refueling ships, towing and rescue ships and surveillance vessels.
