United States | Money for something

What congressional funding reveals about America’s military priorities

Members are happy to fund hardware, but reluctant to let the Department of Defence make cuts

|WASHINGTON, DC

ANYONE WHO has observed Congress over the past decade will be familiar with 11th-hour, slapdash policymaking. The National Defence Authorisation Act (NDAA)—the annual defence-policy bill and one of the few routine, bipartisan pieces of legislation—has followed a familiar pattern. After months of delays in which one of the largest budget categories, was pushed to the back burner in favour of other Democratic priorities, the Senate seemed to abandon efforts to pass the $768bn defence bill (which includes $147bn to buy new hardware) for the 2022 fiscal year. Leaders from both parties eventually compromised and the law passed the House this week. Amid the scramble it was easy to overlook what members of Congress think the mammoth defence budget should actually be for. Following the money reveals where lawmakers think America’s defence priorities lie.

This article appeared in the United States section of the print edition under the headline “Money for something”

What would America fight for?

From the December 11th 2021 edition

Discover stories from this section and more in the list of contents

Explore the edition

More from United States

Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo speaks at a convention in San Fransico

America’s bet on industrial policy starts to pay off for semiconductors

Trump will not reverse the chip subsidies, but will he reinforce them?

A red siren with a beer bottle in the centre

Most Americans think moderate drinking is fine

They are unaware of the cancer risk


Speaker of the US House of Representatives Mike Johnson

Mike Johnson has his old job back, for now

But the GOP has the tightest House majority in nearly a century


When treating snakebites, American hospitals turn to zoos 

The zookeeper will see you now

Los Angeles against the flames

Always vulnerable, the city is increasingly susceptible to fire

The US Army needs less good, cheaper drones to compete

It seems obvious. So what is stopping it from happening?