At a time when Congress is often defined by gridlock, the National Security and Related Programs appropriations bill stands out as a reminder that serious governance still matters. The NSRP bill would fund the essential machinery of American diplomacy, security, and humanitarian engagement. It would keep embassy staff safe, support efforts to monitor emerging threats, and ensure that the United States can project stability in regions where power vacuums quickly become dangerous. In short, this is the type of bill that demonstrates what responsible federal budgeting looks like: targeted, pragmatic, and fundamentally tied to the nation’s core interests.
But there is another reason the bill merits broad support, one that reaches beyond the usual appropriations debates. Within its pages is a clear and unambiguous provision that bars any government funding appropriated under the bill from being allocated to the Taliban. The United States sends millions of dollars to the Taliban every year at a steep cost to American taxpayers and in disregard of the hundreds of thousands of U.S. service members who deployed to Afghanistan during the war.
While the U.S. already maintains stringent restrictions on material support to extremist groups, this provision would strengthen those safeguards and make clear that no statutory loophole may permit funding to reach the Taliban. It is deeply damaging for U.S. funds to end up lining the pockets of the Taliban, the same regime that walked away with billions in U.S. military equipment during the Biden administration’s botched 2021 withdrawal.
Every dollar that reaches the Taliban diminishes the sacrifice of the American service members who have died trying to secure an orderly exit and tarnishes the commitment of members of the U.S. military who served in Afghanistan. It is shameful that, years later, U.S. taxpayers are still footing the bill for the very group that overran the mission we fought to complete.
It is important to note that this prohibition would not halt U.S. support for the Afghan people. Instead, it would ensure that relief continues through properly vetted international organizations, avoiding any possibility that taxpayer dollars inadvertently strengthen a regime with a well-documented record of repression and extremism. It would provide clarity for agencies operating in complex environments and add another layer of congressional oversight to one of the most sensitive foreign policy challenges of the past decade.
A BRIEF HISTORY OF AMERICAN REGIME-CHANGE WARS
Passing the NSRP bill would keep America’s diplomatic and security infrastructure functioning. It would maintain readiness in a world where threats evolve faster than the news cycle. With the Taliban funding prohibition, it would also reaffirm a critical basic principle: U.S. assistance should serve U.S. security interests abroad, not empower those who undermine global security and human rights.
Appropriations bills rarely attract broad public attention, but their consequences ripple far beyond Washington. The NSRP bill is a reminder that some decisions are not about politics; they are about responsibility. In this case, the responsible choice is clear: Pass this NSRP bill as quickly as possible.
Chuck Edwards represents North Carolina’s 11th Congressional District in the House.