House GOP appropriators pass defense spending bill defeating Dem measures on Air Force One, Ukraine 

WASHINGTON — The House Appropriations Committee passed its version of the fiscal 2026 defense spending bill today in an unusually rancorous affair that saw Republicans block Democrat efforts to curtail the Trump administration’s efforts to turn a plane gifted from Qatar into a new Air Force One.

The committee voted 36-27 to send its funding proposal to the House floor, with Democrats calling out the administration’s failure to provide detailed budget justification documents as a key reason for votes against the bill.

Coming in at $832 billion, HAC’s version of the defense appropriations bill is flat relative to the FY25 budget, conforming to the levels set out by the Office of Management and Budget, which intends to use funds from the still-unfinished reconciliation bill to pad defense funds out to $1 trillion. 

The committee’s proposal includes $13 billion for missile defense and space programs associated with the Golden Dome missile shield, $8.5 billion for 69 F-35 fighters — a major increase from the administration’s budget, which includes only 47 jets — and $36.9 billion for shipbuilding, including for two Arleigh Burke-class destroyers not included in the Pentagon’s plans.

While the mark up began with the committee’s Republicans and Democrat leaders complimenting members across the aisle for their work on the spending bill, that bipartisan sentiment unraveled midway during the nearly nine-hour long process.

The tensest point came during debate over an amendment that would prohibit the renaming of the USNS Harvey Milk, after Rep. Andy Harris, R-Md., said that Democrats “don’t have respect for [the] military, at all.”

The remark prompted immediate outcry from the other side of the room, with several Democrats screaming “Shame!” back at Harris, resulting in House Appropriations Chairman Tom Cole, R-Okla., repeatedly banging the gavel to restore order to the room. 

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., submitted a parliamentary inquiry to have Harris’s statements taken out of the record, prompting the committee to recess for more than an hour. Ultimately, Republicans successfully defeated the measure.

Partisan policy issues also led to brief flare-ups.

Connecticut Rep. Rosa DeLauro, the committee’s top Democrat, offered an amendment that would have prohibited the United States from receiving, operating or modifying an airplane that is a gift from a foreign government — an attempt to stop President Donald Trump from accepting a Boeing 747 from Qatar that could be turned into Air Force One before being transferred to Trump’s presidential library after his term. The measure was defeated 27-34.

RELATED: Before lawmakers, Hegseth refuses to disclose cost, schedule to convert Qatari jet to Air Force One

DeLauro argued that the gift violates the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause, which forbids the president from receiving any kind of benefit from a foreign government, and said the money it will take to convert the plane into an Air Force One jet is a waste of taxpayer funds.

“Where is Elon Musk when we need him with a chainsaw? He’s disappeared,” she said. “A president personally accepting a luxury jet from a foreign power at no cost is not just a violation of the law, it flies in the face of what is acceptable for holding the job as an elected official, flies in the face of the Constitution.”

California Rep. Ken Calvert, who chairs the defense appropriations subcommittee, said Congress should allow the courts to decide whether the Qatari gift is legal and noted the continued delays on Boeing’s VC-25B program — the mainline effort to build a modern fleet of presidential transport planes.

“The current Air Force One has been flying for 35 years. The president should have a new Air Force One as soon as possible, given the age of the current aircraft,” he said. “I would hope that this plane can be modified for a reasonable price. … Hopefully that’ll be done quite quickly.”

In another heated debate, lawmakers spent more than an hour weighing an amendment that would have added $300 million in Ukraine security assistance funding. The measure, offered by Rep. Marcy Kaptur, D-Ohio, was defeated in a voice vote.

Cole cautioned that adding funding for Ukraine could end up tanking the defense bill, as it would cause some Republicans to oppose the bill. At the same time, he added, support among Democrats is unlikely due to the conservative policy riders in the bill.

“I say that as somebody’s consistently supported Ukraine. I wrote the bill for the largest single aid package, and my opinion on this has not changed, but the politics is just practical,” he said. “I want to get a defense bill done, and I’m not interested in dividing those who will support it.”

Rep. Chuck Edwards, R-N.C., said he would join Democrats in voting for the amendment, but said it would be hypocritical if Democrats were successful in getting Ukraine funds included in the bill and then refused to vote for it.

“We are the United States of America. We have a responsibility in this world,” he said. “It’s going to be unpopular for me to support this amendment with a lot of people back at home, but by George, I’m going to vote for it.”

After resuming the hearing following the dust up over Harris’s remarks, tempers among lawmakers appeared to cool and Democrats were successful in getting several amendments through the markup process.

One measure, offered by Rep. Mike Levin, D-Calif., stipulates that no funds in the bill could be used for activities that violate the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits the use of the US military for civil law enforcement activities. 

Democrats have argued that the Trump administration’s decision to deploy Marines to Los Angeles could infringe upon the Posse Comitatus Act. However, because the amendment simply restated the idea that funding could not be used to violate US law, Republicans allowed the agreement to move through.

“If that’s as simple as the language is and I don’t think anyone here is going to rewrite Posse Comitatus. So if that’s simply what it says, then I’m prepared to accept the amendment,” Calvert said. 

Republicans also agreed on an amendment that would prohibit funds to be used for any activities that would transmit classified or operational plans across unsecured networks. And GOP members joined Democrats to approve an amendment that would mandate a report on the costs of Trump’s military parade.

An Unprecedented Budget Process

Although some budget documents have begun trickling to Capitol Hill, the Pentagon has yet to release its full fiscal 2026 budget request, leaving lawmakers without the department’s funding projections for the next five years as well as key information justifying the spending.

House appropriators have had to create a version of the FY26 spending plan without such details, releasing a draft bill on Monday. Its defense subcommittee marked up the bill the following day — just minutes after gaveling out a hearing where lawmakers from both sides of the aisle admonished Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth for not providing more budget information ahead of the committee’s process.

Today, Rep. Betty McCollum, the top Democrat on the defense appropriations subcommittee, offered an amendment that would hold travel funding for the defense secretary and service secretaries hostage until the Pentagon submits the “J-Books,” the colloquial name used for detailed budget justification documents.

Republicans defeated that proposed change, with Calvert arguing that Pentagon leaders should not be punished for the slow release of information, instead pointing the finger at the Office of Management and Budget.

“Let’s put the blame on where it really belongs,” he said.

Other amendments offered by Democrats and shot down by the Republican majority included:

• A measure from Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wis., that prohibits the Defense Department from renaming a list of ships named after civil rights activists, such as the planned renaming of the USNS Harvey Milk.
• An amendment, by Rep. Lauren Underwood, D-Ill., that would have prohibited the department from using funds to take down Defense Department educational material or public information about minority and female servicemembers such as the Tuskegee Airmen.