Senator Ted Cruz has consistently pushed for massive increases in defense spending to reverse what he calls “seven years of neglect” under the Obama administration. His plan centers on expanding military personnel, modernizing equipment, and prioritizing combat readiness over bureaucracy. Cruz argues that weakness invites aggression, insisting a rebuilt military would deter adversaries without constant intervention.
– Increase active-duty forces to 1.4 million (up from 1.3 million) with 50,000 additional combat-ready soldiers.
– Add 2,000 Air Force aircraft, 12 new ballistic missile submarines, and 75 naval ships while upgrading nuclear strike capabilities.
– Spend 4.1% of GDP on defense initially (roughly $790 billion in 2017), tapering to 4% annually – far above current 2.8% projections.
Cruz claims these investments can be funded through economic growth sparked by tax cuts, selling federal assets, and trimming wasteful spending. However, independent analyses project his plan would add over a decade if funding falls short. Critics argue the proposed offsets are unrealistic, comparing it to “re-inflating a tire” without strategic prioritization.
In 2025 defense bills, Cruz secured provisions blocking military gender transition care for minors, defunding DEI programs, and directing $147 million for Texas motor pools at Fort Cavazos. He also mandated constitutional training for officers and protected servicemembers from being punished for unfurling giant flags at events.
The senator frames his approach as “more tooth, less tail” – focusing resources on warfighting capabilities rather than social programs. He vows to end “political correctness” in the ranks, opposing women in combat roles and gluten-free MREs as distractions from combat readiness. While rivals like Marco Rubio accuse Cruz of hypocrisy given past votes against defense bills, the Texan counters that true strength requires avoiding “nation-building” quagmires.
Cruz’s vision channels Reagan-era peace-through-strength ideals, betting that overwhelming conventional/nuclear superiority will prevent conflicts rather than requiring them. However, the staggering price tag and reliance on optimistic economic projections leave fiscal conservatives uneasy, even as hawks cheer his pledge to restore America’s deterrent edge.
