Critics Question Billions Spent on Iran Conflict as Americans Seek Healthcare

Prominent figures argue U.S. should invest in domestic priorities instead of 'endless wars'

Published on Mar. 9, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A growing number of public figures, including Sen. Bernie Sanders, former Labor Secretary Robert Reich, and entrepreneur Ramit Sethi, are raising concerns about the high costs of the U.S. military campaign against Iran. They argue that the billions spent on the conflict could be better used to address domestic issues like healthcare, wages, and housing that Americans care more about.

Why it matters

The debate over the economic priorities of the U.S. government has intensified as the costs of the Iran conflict continue to rise. Critics say the country should be focusing on improving the lives of its citizens rather than engaging in another costly military operation in the Middle East.

The details

Estimates suggest the direct military costs of the conflict could range from $40 billion to $95 billion, with broader economic disruption potentially adding another $50 billion to $210 billion in losses. Sen. Sanders has criticized the Trump administration for seeking additional defense funding amid the conflict, arguing that the money would be better spent on domestic priorities. Reich and Sethi have also questioned why fiscal concerns are often raised for social programs but not for military spending.

  • On February 28, President Trump authorized Operation Epic Fury, targeting Iran's missile infrastructure, naval forces, and nuclear facilities.
  • On March 9, Sen. Sanders, Reich, and Sethi voiced their criticism of the high costs of the conflict on social media.

The players

Bernie Sanders

A U.S. senator from Vermont and a prominent critic of the high costs of the Iran conflict.

Robert Reich

A former U.S. Secretary of Labor and a vocal opponent of the government's spending priorities in the Iran conflict.

Ramit Sethi

An entrepreneur and personal finance expert who has questioned the lack of fiscal concerns over military spending compared to social programs.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“We just gave the Pentagon nearly $1 trillion. Then Trump asked for $500 billion more. Now he wants even more money for a war he started in Iran without congressional approval. The answer is NO. We need to invest in the American people, not more endless wars.”

— Bernie Sanders, U.S. Senator (X)

“So far the war in Iran has cost an estimated $5.5 billion. That's roughly $1 billion per day. $41,666,667 per hour. $11,574 per second. People do not want this. They want a living wage. They want healthcare. They want to be able to afford a home. They want their basic needs met.”

— Robert Reich, Former U.S. Secretary of Labor (Bluesky)

“Hey why haven't I heard a single Republican asking 'HOW ARE WE GOING TO PAY FOR IT?' referring to the billions we're spending attacking Iran when they constantly ask that when we try to institute universal healthcare & social services for the poor”

— Ramit Sethi (X)

What’s next

As the conflict with Iran continues, the financial impact and the debate over the government's spending priorities are likely to remain major points of discussion in Washington.

The takeaway

The growing criticism of the high costs of the Iran conflict highlights the disconnect between the government's military spending and the domestic priorities that many Americans care more about, such as healthcare, wages, and housing. This debate underscores the need for a more balanced approach to government spending that addresses the needs of the American people.