Kamala’s Shifting US Defense Budget Stance

Vice President Kamala Harris’s current stance on the U.S. defense budget is unclear, raising questions about the future of America’s military funding.

At a Glance

Kamala Harris previously supported reducing America’s defense budget to redirect funds to domestic priorities.
As Vice President, her stance on defense funding has become ambiguous.
Harris’s office did not respond to requests for comment on her current position.
The Biden-Harris administration faces scrutiny over defense budget decisions, including arms deliveries to Israel.

A Record of Advocacy and Ambiguity

Kamala Harris, serving as a U.S. Senator, consistently advocated for reducing the U.S. defense budget. She aimed to allocate more resources toward communities in need. In 2020, Harris voted against an amendment by Sen. Bernie Sanders to redirect 10% of the Pentagon’s budget. Although she opposed this specific amendment, Harris supported the general goal of strategic defense budget reductions.

As Vice President, Harris’s clear stance on this issue has seemingly faded. Her office has not responded to requests for comments, leaving the public and policymakers in the dark about her current views on defense spending. This lack of clarity comes at a time when decisions about military expenditures significantly impact U.S. domestic and international policies.

Speculation and Scrutiny

Harris’s earlier engagements included discussions with the Uncommitted National Movement regarding a potential arms embargo on Israel. However, her national security advisor later clarified that she does not support such an embargo. The Biden-Harris administration also faced criticism for delaying arms deliveries to Israel. Critics argue these delays were used as leverage in ceasefire negotiations with Hamas, adding to the debate over the administration’s stance on military commitments.

Updating our understanding of Harris’s defense budget stance is critical, given her influence in shaping national security policies. Former President Donald Trump, for example, has been vocal about military spending. Any fluctuation in Harris’s position could signal shifts in federal fund allocations, affecting not just the defense sector but broader fiscal policies.

Economic and Policy Implications

On a related note, Harris, alongside Donald Trump, supports ending taxes on tips, a position aimed at benefiting working families, particularly in key battleground states like Nevada. As of 2023, approximately 4 million U.S. workers are in tipped occupations, representing about 2.5% of all employment. Harris promises to fight for these working families, advocating for a minimum wage increase and the elimination of taxes on tips.

Yet, experts express concerns about the equity, efficiency, and revenue implications of this proposal. Some foresee administrative challenges and potential abuses, such as reclassifying wages as tips to avoid taxes. Harris’s campaign mentioned working with Congress to draft a law that includes an income limit to prevent such abuses, while the proposal could increase the federal budget deficit by $100 billion to $200 billion over ten years.

Amid these domestic policy proposals, Harris’s eventual stance on defense spending remains a pivotal issue to watch. Given her previous advocacy for reducing the defense budget and the current ambiguity, any decisive position could have lasting implications on U.S. fiscal policies.

International Relations and Military Strategy

Alongside domestic concerns, foreign policy observers are keen to understand Harris’s vision on international challenges, especially related to U.S.-China relations and Taiwan. Harris may diverge from Biden’s approach, most notably on the commitment to defend Taiwan against Chinese aggression. As a U.S. Senator, she co-sponsored sanctions against Chinese officials for human rights abuses and supported the Taiwan Travel Act.

Under the Biden-Harris administration, policies aimed at strengthening alliances in the Indo-Pacific region have been pivotal. Harris has played a crucial role in these strategies, reinforcing U.S. ties with ASEAN, Japan, South Korea, and others. Despite potential shifts in approach, the commitment to support Taiwan is unlikely to diminish.

Understanding Kamala Harris’s position on the defense budget is essential for predicting future U.S. policies. Whether her stance solidifies or remains ambiguous, the ramifications will influence America’s military, economic, and global strategies.