President Trump’s 2026 budget proposal calls for a 13% boost in defense spending, topping $1 trillion, while slashing over 20% from non-defense federal programs, according to The Wall Street Journal.
Rep. Mike Flood (R-Ne.) joins Catalysts host Madison Mills to discuss how these cuts could affect his constituents and shares his outlook on how to best relieve national debt.
To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Catalysts here.
President Trump's preliminary 2026 federal budget would increase defense spending by 13% for a total just over $1 trillion. The president's budget proposal would also cut over 20% from all federal non-defense spending, representing over $160 billion. Trump's suggesting cuts to the Department of Energy, the NIH, and the Environmental Protection Agency, among others, but staying away from any proposed cuts to Medicaid, Medicare, or Social Security. Those measures falling to Congress coming forward here. Joining us now, Nebraska Congressman Mike Flood, representative, it's great to speak with you. I do want to start on that skinny budget including over 20% cuts to domestic spending. How are you thinking about your own budget needs and how these cuts to funding could impact both your own policies and your constituents?
Well, I tell you what, we're $36 trillion in debt on our way to $37 trillion in debt, and this is a national security issue. So, we do have to cut spending. I think as a Republican conference, we have been talking about this for the last five years. What do we need to do? How are we going to get there? This reconciliation package is merely the first step. I think you're going to see in our budget that we deliver later this year, you're going to see continued reductions in spending. And ultimately, uh, if we grow the economy by passing the tax cuts and we slow and reduce spending on the other side, that's the only way that we bend the arc on what is a national security issue, our $36 trillion debt.
You mentioned concerns about the deficit. And of course, the Trump administration has touted the idea that tariffs could be a way to start to tackle that deficit. But the administration has also said that there are going to be deals made so that the tariffs are not as severe and has have as severe of an impact on companies. So, which one is it? Are tariffs a measure meant to help tackle the deficit, or are we going to see deals that don't make them as significant of a revenue driver?
Well, look at what happened in the first Trump administration. President Trump cut deals with Canada, Mexico, China. Pair that with the tax cuts that were delivered in 2017, and America saw seismic growth, obviously interrupted with the spending that occurred over the Covid virus. We have the same opportunity to do that here. I'm actually confident that President Trump is going to do the same thing he did in the first administration, and we're going to have fair trade, free trade, with a lot of countries around the world that will return benefits to Nebraska farmers and ranchers, to folks in Pennsylvania, to businesses in California. At the end of the day, I don't think tariffs are going to pay the bills. I think a continued economic growth in the United States with low taxes is the right recipe to get us back on the right track.
