Rep. Ken Calvert, chairman of the House Appropriations defense subcommittee, is raising concerns about the potential for a long-term continuing resolution (CR) for fiscal year 2026. In an exclusive interview with Breaking Defense, Calvert cautioned against repeating a year-long CR, stating that it has already proven „damaging” to the Pentagon.
Push for Short-Term CR
„As an appropriator, I agree with the [House Appropriations Committee] Chairman Tom Cole that we should keep this CR for a short period of time. We need to continue to put the pressure on to get this appropriation process completed,” Calvert said on The Congressional Roundup video series. He expressed a preference for a CR extending into November, allowing sufficient time to negotiate a full-year bill, while opposing the administration’s reported desire for a CR lasting until spring.
Damaging Effects of Continuing Resolutions
Calvert emphasized that while the Department of Defense continues to operate under the FY25 CR, „it’s damaging to the day-to-day operations of the department.” He stressed that the purpose of Congress is to work out a budget and fund the government, rather than relying on continuing resolutions.
Legislative Deadlock
With funding set to expire at the end of the month, Congress has only nine legislative days to agree on a continuing resolution. Republican leaders have yet to unveil the text of a CR, as they are divided on the bill’s strategy. Appropriations committee leaders are advocating for a short-term CR extending into November to allow for negotiations on a full-year bill, while some hardline conservatives are pushing for a longer or full-year CR to freeze federal funding.
Rep. Rosa DeLauro, the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, revealed that the White House has requested Congress extend the CR until Jan. 31.
Limitations of Continuing Resolutions
Calvert warned that continuing resolutions, which maintain funding at the previous fiscal year’s levels, prevent the Pentagon from starting new programs. Even with added flexibility to spend money, „you can’t create enough anomalies to predict what’s necessary within the largest enterprise in the world,” he said, underscoring the importance of passing a full-year budget.
Calvert stated, „It’s been destructive to have a CR this last year, I think, and it’s caused operating problems. I won’t get in the specifics of it, but it’s not the right way to run a business.”
Potential for a „Clean” CR
In previous CRs, Congress has added significant funds for emerging defense needs. However, Calvert suggested that this year’s bill would likely be a „relatively clean” CR without major changes to defense spending but could include „some anomalies, maybe some reprogramming requests.”
Concerns About Government Shutdown
Calvert expressed his concern about a potential government shutdown if Congress fails to pass a CR by the Oct. 1 deadline, saying, „They’re never pleasant, and it serves no purpose. Especially to the Department of Defense. It causes all kinds of difficulties. So hopefully we can be adults and get this worked out.”
Broader Concerns About Long-Term CRs
Rep. Rob Wittman, chairman of the House Armed Services tactical air and land subcommittee, echoed Calvert’s concerns, stating that „all the positive effects” of the $150 billion included for defense in the reconciliation bill would „go away” under a long-term CR.
Sen. Mike Rounds, chair of the Senate Armed Services cybersecurity subcommittee, added that „there is a desire, Republican and Democrat alike, to find a path forward so we don’t have a long term continuing resolution.”
Challenges Ahead for Full Appropriations Bill
Even with a short-term CR, appropriators face an uphill battle to pass a full-year appropriations bill. The Senate’s version of the defense spending bill includes an additional $22 billion for the US military compared to the House bill, which adhered to the White House’s flat budget request.
Achieving a defense bill that can pass both chambers will require careful balancing. Republicans hold a narrow majority in the House, empowering fiscal conservatives who may oppose increased defense spending. Meanwhile, the Senate requires a 60-person majority, necessitating concessions from Republicans to Democrats to meet that threshold.
Calvert indicated openness to increasing the defense topline above the levels currently agreed to in the House bill, saying, „We have a lot of needs within the department. Obviously we passed reconciliation. We have an additional pot of money, $150 billion, but really, those go into specific locations. So we need to still have the backbone in effect, and that’s the appropriation bill.”
