特朗普政府寻求国会2000亿美元资助伊朗战争
作者：伊丽莎白·埃尔金德、亚当·帕克
福克斯新闻
2026年3月21日 美国东部时间上午10:00发布
特朗普政府预期的数十亿美元资助伊朗军事行动的请求可能会遭遇共和党财政强硬派的阻力。
尽管国会共和党人总体上支持特朗普政府在伊朗的冲突，但一些保守派对紧急资金注入（俗称补充拨款）设定了红线：即补充拨款不得增加预算赤字。例如，多位众议院自由党团成员告诉福克斯新闻数字频道，此类资金法案必须通过削减其他领域开支来弥补。
“我认为关键在于确保有‘资金来源’，”亚利桑那州共和党众议员伊莱·克兰告诉福克斯新闻数字频道。
“我希望看到这笔钱的来源，”宾夕法尼亚州共和党众议员斯科特·佩里表示，并补充说他希望伊朗最终承担这些费用。
特朗普集结国防巨头扩大武器生产，伊朗战争持续
2026年2月3日周二，众议院议长迈克·约翰逊抵达华盛顿国会山参加共和党核心会议闭门会议前，停下接受记者提问。（J. Scott Applewhite/美联社照片）
总统和战争部部长皮特·赫格塞斯都未试图否认周四有关政府正考虑注入约2000亿美元以资助伊朗战争并补充消耗弹药的报道，但尚未向国会领导人发出正式请求。
“我们的国债刚刚超过39万亿美元。为‘英勇复仇行动’（Operation Epic Fury）或任何此类补充资金必须提供抵消项，”佐治亚州共和党众议员安德鲁·克莱德在被问及2000亿美元潜在请求时告诉福克斯新闻数字频道。
克莱德表示支持军事行动，但国会批准的任何资源必须“以财政负责的方式”进行。
与此同时，另一位众议院保守派议员（要求匿名以自由发言）告诉福克斯新闻数字频道，财政强硬派可能对资金规模持“怀疑态度”。
赫格塞斯警告“英勇复仇行动”中伊朗战争将导致“更多伤亡”
“美国不会参与2000亿美元的战争。白宫需要详细说明地面部队计划、补充美军弹药的具体金额以及资金来源，”这位议员表示。
由于民主党预计会反对伊朗补充拨款，一些共和党人认为通过预算协调程序将国防开支纳入第二个“大而美丽的法案”可能是共和党阻力最小的途径。
国会民主党高层周四对这项大规模补充拨款表示严厉批评——如果冲突持续，这一立场可能会更加坚定。
“他们绝对不会在我们关心的军事、安全等方面多花一分钱，”德克萨斯州共和党众议员奥古斯特·普夫卢格上周接受福克斯新闻数字频道采访时谈到民主党人。“当前冲突和国家及西方价值观的未来必须通过增加国防开支来保障，而这只能通过协调法案实现。”
战争部部长皮特·赫格塞斯于2026年3月5日在佛罗里达州多拉的美国南方司令部总部举行的首届美洲反卡特尔会议上发言。（Joe Raedle/盖蒂图片社）
周五被问及2000亿美元潜在请求时，普夫卢格未具体置评，但重申了对另一项协调法案的支持。他还指出，协调法案意味着新开支将大部分或全部得到抵消。
“伊朗是世界上最大的国家支持恐怖主义资助者，我强烈支持政府确保美国及其盟友不受威胁的努力，”他在给福克斯新闻数字频道的声明中表示。“增加军事资金的途径可能是通过第二项协调法案，通过合理的抵消措施确保总统的请求完全得到支付。当左翼将国家安全政治化时，我们的战士不会等待。”
预算协调程序允许多数党绕过参议院60票的通过门槛，以简单多数通过立法。2025年上半年，共和党人利用这一立法策略推动特朗普的“大而美丽法案”通过国会。
预算协调也将允许共和党人确定增加国防开支的抵消项。然而，党内对削减开支的分歧可能会显现。
部分共和党人对五角大楼是否需要巨额资金注入持怀疑态度。
“大而美丽法案”已向五角大楼拨款1500亿美元。总统还为下一财政年度请求了1.5万亿美元的国防预算——较当前水平增长超过50%。
2025年7月4日，在白宫南草坪的独立日军事家庭野餐会上，总统唐纳德·特朗普在共和党议员陪同下签署《大而美丽法案》。（Samuel Corum/盖蒂图片社）
点击此处下载福克斯新闻应用
得克萨斯州共和党众议员基思·塞尔夫告诉福克斯新闻数字频道，他希望先看到补充拨款请求的具体细节再决定是否支持。
“国防部已经有段时间未通过审计了，”塞尔夫表示。“我希望在他们在获得1500亿美元后再要求更多资金并通过拨款之前，能先彻底核查账目。”
部分共和党人怀疑众议院共和党人微弱的多数是否能通过任何协调法案，尤其是在选举年。
“我们拭目以待，”已对第二项协调法案前景表示怀疑的纽约州共和党众议员迈克·劳勒在被问及此类法案中的军事资金时告诉福克斯新闻数字频道。
北卡罗来纳州共和党众议员格雷格·墨菲谈到第二项协调法案时表示：“我不知道前景如何，因为有人说我们不会做，而且鉴于我们的微弱多数，这将极具挑战性。”
伊丽莎白·埃尔金德是福克斯新闻数字频道的政治记者，主要报道众议院事务。此前曾在《每日邮报》和哥伦比亚广播公司新闻有过数字媒体署名。
在Twitter上关注她：@liz_elkind，或向elizabeth.elkind@fox.com发送线索。
Trump admin seeking $200B from Congress to fund Iran war
By Elizabeth Elkind, Adam Pack
Fox News
Published March 21, 2026 10:00am EDT
The Trump administration’s anticipated multibillion-dollar funding request to bolster its Iran campaign could face resistance from GOP fiscal hawks.
Though congressional Republicans have been broadly supportive of the Trump administration’s conflict in Iran, some conservatives are drawing a red line that an emergency cash infusion, known as a supplemental, cannot increase budget deficits. Multiple House Freedom Caucus members, for example, told Fox News Digital that such a funding bill would have to be made up for by cutting spending elsewhere.
“I think the big thing there is going to be making sure that there’s a pay-for,” Rep. Eli Crane, R-Ariz., told Fox News Digital.
“I’d like to see how this is paid for,” Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., said, adding that he’d like to see Iran ultimately cover the costs.
TRUMP RALLIES DEFENSE TITANS TO SURGE WEAPONS OUTPUT AS IRAN WAR RAGES
Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., pauses for questions from reporters as he arrives for an early closed-door Republican Conference meeting at the Capitol in Washington, Tuesday, Feb. 3, 2026.(J. Scott Applewhite/AP Photo)
Neither the president nor Department of War Secretary Pete Hegseth has attempted to dispute reports Thursday that the administration is considering an infusion of roughly $200 billion to help finance the Iran campaign and restore depleted munitions. However, no formal request has been sent to congressional leaders yet.
“Our national debt just surpassed $39 trillion. A potential supplemental for Operation Epic Fury — or any supplemental funding for that matter — must be offset,” Rep. Andrew Clyde, R-Ga., told Fox News Digital when asked about the prospective $200 billion request.
Clyde said he supported the mission but that any resources Congress signs off on must be done “in a fiscally responsible manner.”
Meanwhile, another House conservative granted anonymity to speak freely about the Freedom Caucus’s thinking told Fox News Digital that fiscal hawks were likely to be “skeptical” about the price tag.
HEGSETH WARNS ‘MORE CASUALTIES’ EXPECTED IN OPERATION EPIC FURY AGAINST IRAN
“America isn’t signing up for a $200 billion war. The White House needs to give details of a plan regarding boots on the ground and how much is for replenishing our own arsenal, and how it’s being paid for,” that lawmaker said.
With Democrats’ expected opposition to an Iran supplemental, some Republicans believe putting defense spending in a second “big, beautiful bill” via the budget reconciliation process could be the path of least resistance for the GOP.
Top congressional Democrats were sharply critical of a massive supplemental Thursday — a position that could harden if the conflict drags on.
“They are certainly not going to spend an additional dime on the military, on security, on any of the things that we care about,” Rep. August Pfluger, R-Texas, told Fox News Digital in an interview last week, referring to Democrats. “This conflict right now and the future of our country and our Western values have to be secured by additional defense spending, which can only happen in a reconciliation bill.”
Secretary of War Pete Hegseth speaks during the inaugural Americas Counter Cartel Conference at the U.S. Southern Command Headquarters in Doral, Fla., on March 5, 2026.(Joe Raedle/Getty Images)
Pfluger did not comment specifically on the prospective $200 billion request when asked on Friday, but he reaffirmed his support for another reconciliation bill. He also pointed out that reconciliation means that the new spending would be mostly or fully paid for.
“Iran is the largest state sponsor of terrorism in the world, and I strongly support the administration’s efforts to ensure the United States and our allies cannot be threatened,” he said in a statement to Fox News Digital. “The pathway for additional military funding could be through a second reconciliation bill, with commonsense offsets that ensure the president’s request is fully paid for. Our warfighters will not be left waiting while the left plays politics with national security.”
The budget reconciliation process allows the majority party to steer around the Senate’s 60-vote requirement and pass legislation via a simple majority. Republicans used the legislative maneuver to advance Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act through Congress in the first half of 2025.
Budget reconciliation would also allow Republicans to identify offsets to a substantial increase in defense spending. However, intraparty divisions are likely to emerge over spending cuts.
There is also skepticism among some Republicans that the Pentagon needs a massive infusion of money.
The “big, beautiful bill” gave $150 billion to the Pentagon. The president has also requested a $1.5 trillion defense budget for the upcoming fiscal year — more than a 50% increase from current levels.
President Donald Trump, joined by Republican lawmakers, signs the One, Big Beautiful Bill Act into law during an Independence Day military family picnic on the South Lawn of the White House on July 4, 2025.(Samuel Corum/Getty Images)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Rep. Keith Self, R-Texas, told Fox News Digital that he would like to see the specifics of the supplemental request before committing to supporting one.
“The DoD hasn’t passed an audit for a while,” Self said. “I would like for them to scrub things before they start asking for more money after the $150 billion and before the appropriations get passed.”
And some Republicans are doubtful that the House GOP’s razor-thin majority will be able to pass any reconciliation bill at all, particularly in an election year.
“We’ll see,” Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., who’s already signaled skepticism over the prospect of a second reconciliation bill, told Fox News Digital when asked specifically about military funding in such a vehicle.
And Rep. Greg Murphy, R-N.C., told Fox News Digital of a second reconciliation bill, “I don’t know how well the prospects are, because there’s some people saying that we aren’t going to do it, and given our small majority, it’s going to be challenging.”
Elizabeth Elkind is a politics reporter for Fox News Digital leading coverage of the House of Representatives. Previous digital bylines seen at Daily Mail and CBS News.
Follow on Twitter at @liz_elkind and send tips to elizabeth.elkind@fox.com