McCarthy rejects supplemental Ukraine aid bill following debt limit agreement

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy is staring down defense hawks in both parties by vowing not to move a supplemental Ukraine aid bill outside the appropriations process.

Mr. McCarthy on Monday said it was premature to discuss circumventing the recently passed debt limit agreement, which set topline levels for defense spending through 2025.

“This is the most money we’ve ever spent on defense. This is the most money anyone in the world has ever spent on defense,” said Mr. McCarthy, California Republican. “So I don’t think the first answer is to do a supplemental.”

The debt limit agreement reached by Mr. McCarthy and President Biden keeps domestic spending flat for the coming fiscal year. It boosts defense spending by more than 3% to $886 billion.

Defense hawks say the hike amounts to a cut, given that inflation has grown more than 3% the past year.

“It’s right to want to control spending, and there are some good things in this bill,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, South Carolina Republican. “But it was wrong to give a defense number inconsistent with the threats we face.”

Mr. Graham and allies held up consideration of the debt limit law last week until assured that Congress would move a supplemental defense bill. Defense hawks said the additional funding measure was needed to ensure the U.S. was able to continue its aid of Ukraine.

Some, like Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Jack Reed, said the supplemental legislation could serve as a vehicle for funding other defense-related priorities.

“I think with Ukraine, you’re going to have to have a supplemental,” said Mr. Reed, Rhode Island Democrat. “We might put some other stuff in, too.”

Mr. McCarthy disagrees. The speaker said the $886 defense topline should be final and that lawmakers should look for areas to cut from the current defense budget in order to boost aid for Ukraine.

“The last five audits, the Department of Defense has failed,” said Mr. McCarthy. “So there’s a lot of place for reform [where] we can have a lot of savings.”