Rep. John Garamendi (D-Calif.), a vocal nuclear critic and member of the House Armed Services Strategic Forces subcommittee, told the Exchange Monitor over the phone Thursday that the extra funding for weapons activities in the White House budget could be better spent on non-proliferation or studying plutonium aging.
“At the same time they’re increasing the budget for weapons, probably mostly for plutonium pits, they are cutting the nonproliferation account,” Garamendi said. “And it was basically very very slim to begin with.”
According to the DOE’s and White House’s congressional justification for fiscal 2026, the National Nuclear Security Administration would get $30 billion, or $5.9 billion and 24% more than in 2025. Of the $5.9 billion increase, $5.5 billion went to increasing weapons activities funding from $19.2 billion in 2025 to $24.8 billion in 2026. Defense nuclear nonproliferation would get $2.28 billion in 2026, down from $2.39 in 2025, according to the document.
Aside from around $4.8 billion, these numbers do not include those of the reconciliation bill, which would raise weapons activities funding by a total of 53% when combined with the White House budget, according to a press release by Nuclear Watch New Mexico.
“So why don’t we take that 0.5 [billion dollars out of the $5.5 billion] and put it back into the nonproliferation account?” Garamendi said. “That’s for starters. Now what about the $5 billion itself? Some of that money needs to be spent on an analysis of the existing plutonium, the viability of the existing plutonium pits.”
Garamendi is referring to studies on plutonium aging to determine whether the stockpile of nuclear weapons needs new plutonium pits or can use recycled older pits, which Garamendi says will save taxpayer dollars. He cites the JASON study, a group of independent scientists studying plutonium pits. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory also does studies on plutonium aging.
“We do not know what they intend to do with the additional $5.5 billion, we do know that they intend to continue to pursue what ultimately is going to be the ultimate sinkhole for taxpayer dollars which is the Savannah River Facility,” Garamendi said.
“What to do with the 5.5? Well put it back in for, how about, keeping kids healthy, or avoiding the next pandemic,” Garamendi said. “Researching on radiation, that ought to be something we can think about.”
Notably, there were some variants between these figures and those of the appendix released May 30. For example, the appendix says that defense nuclear nonproliferation would get $2.29 billion, while the DOE’s budget in brief says that account would get $2.28 billion. There were also minor differences in the federal salaries and expenses, though the Exchange Monitor determined that account would get $555 million for fiscal 2026 compared to $500 million in 2025.
