WASHINGTON — The US House Budget Committee approved a spending plan that would clear the way for $613 billion for national defense in 2016.

The panel's 22-13 vote sends the GOP-crafted measure to the House floor. But first, it will land in the powerful Rules Committee, where it is expected to be amended to include even more in Pentagon spending.

Lawmakers explained the complicated "steps," as House Armed Services Committee Chairman Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas put it, to reporters. When the resolution lands in Rules, its $90 billion overseas contingency operations (OCO) account could end up closer to $100 billion.

What's more, defense hawks want to keep a $20 billion Budget Committee-created "reserve fund" in the measure, which could be tapped for Defense Department spending in fiscal 2016.

The House's defense funding level could hit $613 billion, $2 billion more than the White House requested.

The OCO funds and, reportedly, the new $20 billion would not be subject to the 2011 Budget Control Act's spending caps. Hawks want to make sure it would not require offsets from elsewhere in the federal budget.

House GOP leaders are open to adding the war account funds to appease nearly 70 defense hawks, who have threatened to withhold their support and maybe kill the resolution on the floor.

But it appears some of them are coming around.

"As I understand it, there's a path forward where I can support the budget on the floor," Thornberry told reporters.

HASC member Rep. Mike Turner, R-Ohio, appeared in support of the new plan, saying he would vote for it on the floor "as long as defense is fully funded."

Not every member, however, is enthused.

In an exchange with Maj. Gen. Michael D. Lundy, commander of the Army's Aviation Center of Excellence, HASC member Rep. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., referred to, "the games that we are playing with putting money in the OCO instead of the base," saying it would place military officials in a difficult position.

For the latest national security news from Capitol Hill, read CongressWatch

"I'm concerned is that we are structuring the force to the dollars and the political will," she said, "as opposed to, what do we need you to do, and giving you the resources to do what you need."

Joe Gould contributed to this report.

Share:
More In Congress