Lawmakers are scrambling to allocate over $1 billion for Capitol Police security, signaling a new era of heightened vigilance in response to the recent surge in political violence. The assassination of Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator, has ignited fears across Congress, with even fiscal conservatives like Rep. Tim Burchett pushing for expanded security measures. This unprecedented spending reflects the deepening alarm among lawmakers about personal safety, as threats against high-profile public figures continue to escalate.
The debate over security spending is splitting along ideological lines, with some GOP budget hawks accusing Republican leadership of failing to allocate enough resources to protect members. Burchett, a vocal critic of Ukraine aid funding, criticized leaders for what he called inadequate security budgets, while others, including Rep. David Schweikert, have privately invested heavily in personal security. Despite these concerns, negotiations over security funding have stalled, with leaders struggling to balance safety with fiscal responsibility.
Meanwhile, members are pushing for more comprehensive protection, including round-the-clock security details for all lawmakers and modifications to existing policies that allow for more flexible use of funds for home security improvements. The House is racing to finalize the legislative branch budget for fiscal 2026, which includes a $30 million boost to Capitol Police to improve partnerships with state and local law enforcement. The final outcome remains uncertain as both sides grapple with balancing safety with fiscal caution.
As the situation unfolds, the Capitol Police operate on a $806.5 million budget, a 73 percent increase since 2020. The need for enhanced security is obvious, but questions linger about what level of spending is truly effective. Rep. David Valadao, chair of the Appropriations Subcommittee, acknowledged the complexity of determining what constitutes a ‘sweet spot’ for member safety.
Leaders are also considering allocating as much as $25,000 per month for select lawmakers to obtain additional protection if deemed under serious threat. However, the criteria for determining who qualifies for these additional funds remains unclear, prompting concerns among members about potential biases or oversights in the selection process.
Meanwhile, Reps. Bryan Steil and Joe Morelle, the House Administration Committee’s chair and ranking member, are working outside the government funding process to shift existing resources to support member security. Steil emphasized that the focus has shifted to ensuring members understand the programs currently in place to protect them, while Morelle acknowledged the difficulty of preventing all potential threats, many of which stem from personal issues.
The reality is that numerous programs are already in place to support lawmakers when they are away from the Capitol complex. Members can use office funds for security equipment, such as cameras or ballistic vests, and there is discussion about adjusting the current $20,000 lifetime cap on home security systems to allow for capital improvements like bulletproof windows or perimeter fencing.
As the debate continues, some members have raised concerns about the suggestion that they should be fundraising for their own protection. Burchett suggested that a consensus should be built and put forward for debate, signaling a potential compromise as the House moves toward a decision on the final security budget for 2026.