The House of Representatives approved an $832 billion defense appropriations bill for fiscal year 2026 early Friday morning, pushing forward a controversial spending package that sparked sharp criticism from Democrats over its funding details and socially divisive provisions.

The legislation passed narrowly by a vote of 221-209, with only five Democrats joining Republicans to back the measure.

Its advancement now places the national defense funding debate in the hands of the Senate, which has yet to unveil its version of the fiscal 2026 budget.

Currently, the Department of War is operating under a modified continuing resolution for fiscal 2025, supplemented by additional funding for specific programs and acquisitions.

Here's What They're Not Telling You About Your Retirement

Lawmakers are hoping to avoid a repeat scenario next year, but time is running short. Congress has only about six legislative weeks remaining to finalize appropriations bills before the risk of a partial government shutdown looms.

The timing of the House’s plan has also drawn scrutiny. Much of the proposal was drafted before Pentagon officials released their detailed fiscal 2026 budget requests last month.

President Donald Trump has referred to his proposal as a “$1 trillion defense budget,” but that figure includes one-time supplemental funding approved through a separate reconciliation process.

The House measure’s base funding level actually reflects a slight decrease compared to the current fiscal year — a point of concern for both Democrats and some Republicans.

This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year

Despite the criticism, Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Appropriations Committee’s defense subpanel, defended the bill’s structure and objectives.

“Providing our men and women in uniform with the resources they need to keep America safe,” Calvert said, highlighting the bill’s emphasis on strategic priorities.

Among the key investments in the bill is a 3.8% pay raise for military personnel, which aligns with the standard federal formula for annual compensation increases.

The legislation also includes significant funding for advanced weapons programs, including $2.6 billion for hypersonic technologies and $13 billion for missile defense initiatives tied to Trump’s "Golden Dome" initiative.

The plan sets aside billions in aircraft procurement: $8.5 billion for 69 F-35 fighter jets, $3.8 billion for the B-21 Raider stealth bomber, $2.7 billion for 15 KC-46 aerial refueling tankers, and $1.2 billion for four E-2D Advanced Hawkeye airborne early warning aircraft.

Additionally, $37 billion is earmarked for Navy shipbuilding, including the procurement of one Columbia-class ballistic missile submarine and two Virginia-class fast attack submarines.

However, one of the most contentious provisions in the bill involves a proposed cut to the Defense Department’s civilian workforce, eliminating roughly 45,000 positions — a move projected to save $3.6 billion.

Democrats pushed back strongly on the cut, warning that it would jeopardize both readiness and administrative operations.

Even more divisive were the bill’s policy riders targeting social issues.

The measure contains restrictions that prohibit military health care facilities from offering abortion services, ban transgender medical care and surgeries, and eliminate funding for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs within the Pentagon.

“These poison pill riders will not go unnoticed by our troops,” said Rep. Betty McCollum (D-Minn.), the top Democrat on the House defense appropriations subcommittee. “They will impact recruitment and retention.”

Republican backers argue that the bill restores focus to core military objectives while addressing wasteful spending, but critics say the inclusion of partisan policy provisions undermines the military’s efforts to build a diverse, all-volunteer force.

The defense appropriations bill’s path to final passage remains uncertain.

It was delayed earlier in the week due to unrelated floor disputes and could face similar roadblocks in the Senate, especially amid larger disagreements over federal spending and proposed cuts to domestic programs.

In the coming days, House members are expected to turn their attention to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which sets overall policy and spending priorities for the Department of War.

However, that measure does not actually allocate funds and is unlikely to be debated on the House floor before lawmakers depart for their August recess.

As partisan clashes over defense spending and social policy intensify, the fate of the Pentagon’s budget — and potentially the stability of government operations — hangs in the balance heading into a critical legislative stretch.

Warning: Account balances and purchasing power no longer tell the same story. Know in 2 minutes if your retirement is working for you.