Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., is taking a firm stance against any potential deployment of U.S. ground troops in Iran, saying she will oppose funding legislation tied to such a move.

“I’ll be voting against the funding if we’re putting troops on the ground,” Mace said outside the Capitol. “I’m not going to fund that.”

She reinforced her position in a post on X, stating, “If a single boot of a single American soldier sets foot on Iranian soil, I will vote against this. I will not vote to fund sending South Carolina’s sons and daughters to die in a ground war in Iran.”

The comments come as the Pentagon advances a roughly $200 billion supplemental funding request tied to ongoing operations in the Middle East. The proposal has sparked debate in Congress, with lawmakers weighing both the cost and scope of U.S. involvement.

Defense officials argue the funding is necessary as operations intensify, with early estimates putting the first days of fighting at more than $11 billion and ongoing costs potentially nearing $1 billion per day. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth defended the request, saying strong military funding is essential to maintaining U.S. security.

President Donald Trump has also backed the spending, describing it as necessary to ensure American strength in an increasingly volatile world, while rejecting claims that the U.S. plans to launch a ground invasion of Iran.

Despite that assurance, divisions remain on Capitol Hill. Some Republicans support the funding request, while others, alongside Democrats, are seeking more clarity from the administration before approving additional resources. Concerns have also been raised about the possibility of expanded operations in the region.

The Pentagon has already increased its military presence, deploying additional Marines and sailors while preparing elements of the Army’s 82nd Airborne Division for potential action.

Mace, a Citadel graduate who has supported joint U.S.-Israeli strikes against Tehran, drew a clear distinction between backing military action and committing ground troops, signaling that opposition to a broader war could complicate passage of the administration’s funding request.