To: Members of the U.S. House Committee on Appropriations
From: National Taxpayers Union
Date: June 9, 2026
Subject: NTU’s Views Regarding the Committee Markup of FY 2027 Labor/HHS and Homeland Security Bills
I. Introduction
On behalf of National Taxpayers Union, the nation’s oldest taxpayer advocacy organization, we write to express our views regarding two bills slated for consideration before the House Committee on Appropriations on June 9, 2026. In light of this year’s estimated $1.8 trillion federal budget deficit and our overall federal debt of $39 trillion, NTU requests that the Committee carefully consider the interests of taxpayers before considering any increases in discretionary allocation over last year’s authorized levels. Any increase in spending should be fully offset elsewhere, in light of our massive federal debt level, and should generally be avoided.
II. NTU Views Regarding June 9 Markup
Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations (LaborH) Bill - NTU Supports with Reservations
The Full Committee Mark of the fiscal year 2027 LaborH bill proposes a total discretionary allocation of $189.3 billion, saving taxpayers $5.6 billion (3%) over the FY 2026 enacted level. Since this bill lowers topline spending from the previous fiscal year, and also successfully reduces the scope of government programs in a variety of areas, we believe that it is a pro-taxpayer piece of legislation. It cuts back on unnecessary spending on refugee programs, eliminates several duplicative agencies and offices, and ends bureaucratic hoops on unnecessary grant programs.
However, we are less enthusiastic about all of the earmarks placed into the LaborH bill this year. Last year’s House version of the bill contained no earmarks, while the Senate version included a large number of projects. This year, the House included 463 earmarks at a total cost to taxpayers of over $420 million. We are mindful of the political realities surrounding earmarks, and understand that appropriations bills are more likely to move forward if these are included. However, if projects do not serve a federal purpose, then taxpayers should not be paying for them. For example, why should a taxpayer in Illinois or Montana pay for medical equipment at a health clinic in the Virgin Islands, or in Monterey Park, CA? If this equipment is actually needed by these clinics, then state or local taxpayers should pay for them, while federal taxes help pay back our massive federal debt.
Homeland Security Bill - NTU Opposes
This draft legislation proposes a total discretionary allocation of $64.9 billion for the Department of Homeland Security for fiscal year 2027, approximately $700 million higher than the 2026 authorized spending levels. However, both last year and this year’s appropriations bills do not directly account for taxpayer dollars authorized outside of the normal appropriations process via reconciliation. “Reconciliation 2.0,” the Secure America Act, by itself adds $70 billion in additional spending for the Department. We understand that, in the current hypercharged political environment, some politicians are refusing to fund even basic border protection and immigration enforcement functions, but Congress works better when the normal appropriations process is followed. NTU does not support this end run around the appropriations process, particularly for increased spending that is not paid for. For this reason alone, we cannot support this appropriations bill.
Furthermore, a number of the earmark projects listed in this bill do seem to serve a federal purpose. Of the 113 projects in the bill, with a total bill for taxpayers of $125 million, over half are pre-disaster mitigation grants that can help reduce taxpayer costs down the road, while another $48 million has been dedicated to improve Emergency Operations centers at locations across the country. While a number of these projects are too local in nature to serve a federal purpose, like spending a million dollars to improve drainage on a street in Somerton, AZ, spending wisely before disasters can reduce federal taxpayer costs later on.
III. Conclusion
In light of the ballooning level of federal debt, taxpayers can no longer afford increases in any federal appropriations bill without direct offsets within the bill itself. The era of uncontrolled federal spending needs to end before our nation’s fiscal trajectory veers dangerously off course. We appreciate the efforts of the Committee in proposing lower spending in one of the two bills being considered at this markup, and understand the political realities regarding the Homeland Security bill. However, we still believe that the interest of taxpayers could be better served by taking a closer look at spending included in this bill. Should you have any questions about the recommendations in this memo, please do not hesitate to reach out to David Timmons (dtimmons@ntu.org).