Defense hawks oppose House GOP’s six-month CR plan

House Speaker Mike Johnson’s (R-La.) Plan B for a stopgap federal spending bill is a no-go if it still includes a six-month time frame, according to GOP defense hawks.

“If it goes past December 31, I’m not voting for it,” House Armed Services Committee Chair Mike Rogers (R-Ala.) told The Hill on Wednesday.

House GOP leaders earlier Wednesday pulled their six-month stopgap funding plan hours ahead of a scheduled floor vote amid opposition from defense hawks, hard-line conservatives and moderates.

Johnson appeared ready to press forward with a vote on his funding plan, which links a six-month continuing resolution (CR) with a bill backed by former President Trump that would require proof of citizenship to vote. 

But at least 12 Republicans made it known they would not vote for the legislation, including Rogers, sinking the bill’s chances. 

Johnson said they’ll delay the vote until next week as they work to “build consensus.”

Now GOP defense hawks, who worry about the impact of not increasing funding for the Pentagon, say they want to see a shorter CR in the next iteration of Johnson’s plan.

“I’m not putting any pressure on [Johnson]. I’ve just told him that I will agree to CR … but I won’t explore anything that goes past December 31,” Rogers said when asked about conversations on the Speaker’s Plan B.

House Armed Services Committee Vice Chair Rob Wittman (R-Va.) said the longer the CR goes into the next year, “the more problematic it becomes” for U.S. defense.

“The bottom line is we want to do what’s best for the nation’s defense,” he told The Hill. “We just want to make sure [Johnson] understands that … I want to make sure that we’re all part of getting something done.”

He added on the CR: “Our effort is to just to make it as short as possible, because that minimizes the impact on defense.”

Asked whether any CR that goes past three months would be a no-go for him, Wittman replied that he doesn’t have “any lines in the sand” and that its “a pretty dynamic situation.”

And Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Calif.), who oversees the Pentagon’s budget, said Monday that while he was prepared to back Johnson, he didn’t like the six-month time frame as it “inhibits” the Defense Department.

“It’s the largest enterprise in the world,” he said of the U.S. military. “You can’t run that under that [six-month] period of time.”

The Pentagon has also vehemently opposed any long-term CR, with Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin over the weekend sending letters to top House and Senate appropriations leaders arguing such a bill would impose a “litany of difficulties” on the military.

Austin said an extended version of the temporary measure would “set us significantly behind” in meeting the challenges from China and the ongoing wars in Europe and the Middle East.

The letters are notable as the Pentagon typically has to endure a CR that lasts several months, given that lawmakers have failed to finalize the military appropriations bill all but one time since 2011 — in fiscal 2019. But in that same time frame, the Defense Department has not had stopgap funding that lasts longer than three months.

Congressional deadlock over fiscal 2024 funding kept the government on a CR well past that deadline, impacting Defense operations until it was fully funded last March.

For fiscal 2025, the Pentagon has requested a $849.8 billion budget, arguing that operating under those levels once the Sept. 30 deadline has passed impacts an array of programs, services and projects.

What’s more, failing to pass appropriations bills by Jan. 1 triggers a limitation set by the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023, reached between President Biden and House Republicans last year.

Under that act, failure to pass full government funding by January will start a process to reduce the discretionary spending limits for national security by 1 percent below fiscal 2023 levels. Austin said that could force the Pentagon to lose $42 billion from the 2025 budget request.

The pressure campaign from the Defense Department as well as defense hawks is increasing the likelihood that House Republicans will wind up with a three-month CR backed by Democrats and the White House.

Lawmakers have until Sept. 30 to agree upon a short-term extension for the federal dollars or risk shuttering nonessential tasks within the Pentagon, in addition to dozens of government agencies.