DoD Budget FY 2023

HBUD: Department of Defense FY 2023 Budget, April 27, 2022

My first job out of graduate school in 1986 was with the Comptroller of the Air Force, later the Assistant Secretary for Financial Management. I picked this agency for my management intern appointment because of my background as the son of an Air Force test engineering contractor.

I mention this, though a liberal, to point out that the Defense Budget is an integral part of both the U.S., local and many family economies. There is no such thing as a budget which contains program efficiencies allowing for less than one percent annual growth after the upcoming biennium. Even if this were possible, it would not be good for families or the economy.

Some similar activity is required to employ our "industrial base." The term makes this sound like a boondoggle. It is not. The various contractors are not as important as the skilled workforce and their families. These families buy things, from homes to baby food to date night.

The obvious substitute, as we commented last June, is expanding space exploration. Current commercial initiatives help fill the gap, but we need to go bigger. Doing so allows an even greater cost shifting from weapons development and procurement while programming larger budgets than the Administration has requested. 

From last year: 

One such effort is research on Closed Loop Environmental Support Systems. Doing so could provide alternate means of agriculture, water treatment and home building. It ends the problem of population, conceivably on a worldwide basis.

NASA spending has much room to grow and shifting it to Defense Appropriations gives it more room to ask for more funding. Eventually, recent progress in private sector space services and management will end the need for a NASA budget. 

The current pace of commercial space development is exciting, but it is nothing compared to what is possible. I have some suggestions:

• Conduct orbital experiments to determine whether artificial gravity as currently envisioned will, in fact, work. Start with two small modules in the ends of trusses radiating from a center module with a fly wheel to control rotation and an electric motor and small nuclear power unit (or solar panel structures) would suffice. 

• Rotating modules and passageways to the base module could all be inflatable to save weight and cost. Truss length should be expandable to test various gravitational levels at various rotational speeds. Such a system could be deployed with three or four launches, assuming the power system is a separate launch.

• Develop on-earth limited closed environmental systems with human testing, but without unrealistic conditions like no mechanical oxygen conversion or outside food resupply. See what can be done and improve it as lessons are learned.

• Expand experiments into cloned protein, but with cloned fat, bone and blood rather than using plant-based substitutes. These are too high on the glycemic index. The product should be something that non-vegans would actually eat.

• Develop small crew geosynchronous orbital missions, and later stations, to explore manned infrastructure options.

• Develop systems to capture space debris, either manned or unmanned. Some items could be repaired and stowed rather than discarded into the Pacific space jynk graveyard.

Last year, we suggested that this initiative might include more cooperation with our Russian partners. What a difference a year makes.

Given the situation on the ground in Ukraine and Russia, barring a nuclear holocaust, by the next fiscal year (or soon after), increased spending will be required to help rebuild Ukraine and to rebuild some kind of Russian military and civil society. President Putin has destroyed his own forces through corruption and ineptitude. I cannot imagine that he will be allowed to continue by the Russian military establishment.

Cooperation in aerospace is a way in the door for providing aid in rebuilding a Russian nation that has never really been developed. It went from kleptocratic commissars to kleptocratic oligarchs. The nation needs serious help. 

What it does not need is a strategic nuclear arsenal. Part of the cost of helping Russia move forward is mutually assured disarmament. As de facto global police officer, we still need some capability. Russia does not.

Building for space infrastructure will take full advantage of the Russian industrial base, just as it is essential for our own. From there, Russian physical and economic infrastructure can be expanded. Russian brides and orphans need not be one of their chief exports.

Please see our attachment from last year's submission, which includes suggested appropriations committee report language on reporting where defense assets are deployed, rather than on where they are purchased. This will be useful in the event some form of regionally based fiscal policy is developed. 

The second attachment includes suggestions previously provided on improving the congressional budget and appropriations process. Having served in financial management, procurement and as a contract proposal coordinator, I can assure you that the greatest source of waste in federal finance is the United States Congress. 

Process reforms to get legislation passed on time will allow the rest of the system to implement greater efficiencies. Part of any reform must include new caps be set through 2030 so that budget passage is assured through the next presidential term.  These caps must be realistic, rather than punitive, so that automatic enactments can occur without harm.

As you may recall, I have suggested creating a joint budget committee. This is still a good idea. Within it could be three subcommittees: revenue, civil and defense. The JBC Defense Subcommittee would include Armed Services and Defense Appropriations chairs and ranking members.  Space exploration would be within their purview.

Once a top line number is agreed to, a separate joint defense budget resolution should be drawn up and passed so that authorization and appropriations committees can begin work in earnest. If work on both the authorization and appropriation bills are not passed by a date certain, their markups would be discharged and sent to a joint select committee for negotiation and completion. Our warfighters, their civilian and contract supports and all of their families deserve no less.

Videos: 

https://youtu.be/39nqkUdUlmE 

https://youtu.be/DundAnh2HUc 

Attachment: Committee Reports and the Budget Process 

Video https://youtu.be/HUBDpsSbZ1E

Attachment: Budget Process 

Video  https://youtu.be/ZJlXGjAu4vg

HHS Budget FY 2023

House Budget: Department of Health and Human Services FY 2023 Budget, April 6, 2022

Ways and Means: Proposed Fiscal Year 2023 Budget with Health & Human Services, April 28, 2022

Finance: The President’s Fiscal Year 2023 Health and Human Services Budget, April 5, 2022

There have been more than a few hearings this spring to set the stage for the release of this budget. I will briefly restate some of our comments. Links to our comments can be found on our Fiscal Equity blog and YouTube channel. These hearings include:

Senate Finance: Behavioral Health Care When Americans Need It: Ensuring Parity and Care Integration, March 30, 2022 Video

Ways and Means: America’s Mental Health Crisis, February 2, 2022 Video See also: Finance: Mental Health Care in America: Addressing Root Causes and Identifying Policy Solutions, June 15, 2021

Ways and Means, Worker and Family Support:  Improving Family Outcomes through Home Visiting, March 16, 2022 Video

Ways and Means, Health:  Bridging Health Equity Gaps for People with Disabilities and Chronic Conditions, February 3, 2022 Video

Please also see our many Pandemic related comments, which took the Centers for Disease Control to task for not correctly assessing the early symptoms of the virus.  See especially

Ways and Means,  Health: The Path Forward on COVID-19 Immunizations, February 26, 2021

We agree with the President’s proposals to add funding to prepare for a future pandemic and to fund the ARPA-H Cancer Moonshot. Discoveries relating to the former will likely help the latter.

Part of ARPA-H is the funding for research on orphan drugs and the lingering problem of their cost once research leads to product development. In comments to Senate Finance on March 16th of this year, we repeated our proposal in this area for NIH to retain ownership in any such drug and contract out its further development and manufacture. Keeping ownership in public hands ends the need for drug companies to charge extreme prices or increase prices for its existing formulary to fund development.

PhARMA would still make reasonable profit, but the government would eat the risk and sometimes reap the rewards. NIH/FDA might even break even in the long term, especially if large volume drugs which were developed with government grants must pay back a share of basic research costs and the attached profits, as well as regulatory cost.

On the pandemic, we urge that there be a public examination of lessons learned - particularly mistakes. The largest mistake was to not identify COVID-19 as being spread like a cold.

Subsequent variants identified sneezing and a runny nose as early signs of the virus. This was true in the first round, but to save face, it was not mentioned and is still not admitted. Job one of preparing for the next coronavirus pandemic is to list cold or supposed allergy symptoms as the signal to self-quarantine (if not be quarantined). 

Donald Trump did not kill a million people. Trying to downplay original symptoms did - which led to a loss of credibility among some populations. This social aspect must also be explored - especially if these populations are to comply with later instructions.

The President's proposals  to expand behavioral health are most welcome, although only a start. Replacing mental health facilities - as well as policies which allow longer-term mandatory stays are what is needed - including conditions whereby readmission to a more controlled environment is automatic in the event of relapse or medication non-compliance.

Such a change in the rules of the game will demand 50-state cooperation, as local laws are impacted. The Department of Justice and state and local police agency participation is also required. Reform cannot only be for those with insurance - it must be for everyone. Parity is not enough - and is impossible without not only more beds - but more dedicated hospitals.

The Visiting Nurses program is worthy of expansion - not only in public sector funding, but in the private sector as well. When my daughter was born, a visiting nurse to screen for depression and help with lactation coaching would have been a godsend, although we were lucky for generous family leave policies and good health insurance through my wife’s employer. Health Insurance Reform will allow an even greater expansion of the pilot program to all. I will come back to this shortly.

New mothers and their partners have unmet needs beyond the particular programs listed in the House Budget Committee Summary. We cannot take our eye off of the Child Tax Credit ball. It must be both refundable and more generous. So that families are not simply living off of their CTC, the minimum wage needs to go up - although with a higher Child Credit a lower amount can be agreed to. Childcare subsidies are also as essential now as they were last year.

We have attached a portion of our comments from last year having to do with the Affordable Care Act, enacting a public option, how the issue is related to Student Loan forgiveness (here’s a clue - baselines) and how to reform Medicaid and Medicare to remove the biggest Medicaid contingent liability from state budgets.

Considering the problems getting Build Back Better over the line, I can see where opening discussions on the Public Option and Medicare for All might prove difficult - especially given the lack of agreement between the relevant committees.

I hope I am not shocking anyone by saying this. With that said, it is time for both CMMS and the Budget and Revenue Committees to start discussing what might be done in the next Congress on a bipartisan basis.

Please allow me to offer questions for research and discussion:

Would a public option be more likely to pass if Affordable Care Act surtaxes (SMI) were repealed?

What would be the impact on passage and operation of a public option of ending pre-existing condition reform with automatic enrollment in the public option, with subsidies, if coverage were denied?

How large would subsidies have to be to hold those who cannot get insurance due to a pre-existing condition harmless?

Are Affordable Care Act deductibles and premiums too high? (It seemed so to me when I had them and suffered a broken rib - for which the provider was never paid).

Can a public option, or even the ACA as it exists, meet all of its goals without either immigration reform or ending the prohibition on covering undocumented workers?

To what extent is sick leave (Building Back Better), essential for the ACA to really cut prices?

To what extent would the public option replace Medicaid?

Would reform be easier to pass if long term care were funded as Medicare Part E rather than being operated and funded by the states? (This would also require 50-state cooperation).

What is the best way to fund a public option (or Medicare for All)? Is some form of border adjustable goods and services tax better than a payroll tax? Would an employer-paid subtraction VAT be better?

SVAT would burden profits and would replace current funding of the Affordable Care Act and the tax exclusion for employer-provided health insurance. Corporate Income Taxes and Schedules C and F for Form 1040 would be replaced with this tax. See the second attachment for details.

How long would it take for insurance companies to deny anyone who is sick coverage, thus forcing them into a subsidized public option? Would this become Medicare for All, given that much private managed care, Medicaid and Medicare Parts B and D or Part C are all offered by the same list of providers, albeit with different copays?

Income Security is also in need of advanced study..

While Social Security 2100 is the school solution preferred by most mainstream analysts, should some form of expanded employee-ownership be part of the solution?

To study this, HHS, the IRS and the Department of Labor - as well as their authorizing committees, should look at how to expand employee-ownership.

The same bodies must also explore the impact of increasing the minimum wage on benefit levels, assuming that any increase lead to a rebasing of employment history.

What is the impact of crediting the employer contribution on an equal dollar basis rather than as a match to the employee contribution?

Would rebasing income history with a higher minimum wage and an equal dollar employer contribution end poverty among the low income elderly and disabled? Is it a matter of degree? How much would the minimum wage have to change to make a significant impact?

How would addressing such questions impact Social Security 2100?

Attachment: HHS Budget, F Y 2022 Video

Attachment: Tax Reform with attached videos

Overcoming Racism to Advance Economic Opportunity

WM: Overcoming Racism to Advance Economic Opportunity, April 6, 2022

The title of this hearing is ironic in two ways. First is its association with Opportunity Zones, which are merely the latest provision for “gentrifying” neighborhoods by getting older people of color and the poor out of the neighborhood. In recovery, there is a saying. The best way to hit bottom is to stop digging. Let's try doing that first. I addressed this topic in October in comments to the Oversight Subcommittee, which are attached.

The second way it is ironic is that the real way to overcome racism is to ensure economic opportunity. Racism (and other forms of bigotry) arise to divide the middle and working classes and distract them from the real work of economic justice. 

Last month, we provided comments to the House Budget Committee on Ensuring Women Can Thrive in a Post-pandemic Economy. These comments are made in the context of Build Back Better from the FY 2022 Budget. For now, this is the best course. They are attached.

In the long run, employee-ownership must be developed further and extended to the provision of social services to its members. An employee-owned economy will dramatically increase both opportunity and equality. The way to truly get there is for employee-owned firms to extend the benefits of ownership to their overseas subsidiaries and supply chains. A working class with nothing to fear leaves racism, nativism, sexism and all divisiveness behind. If we proceed from that point, ending racism becomes possible.

We have attached our tax reform plan, which shows how to fund more robust child tax credits, childcare and health insurance and how to move the control of enterprises from public and private ownership to cooperative ownership using an asset value added tax. Even without comprehensive reform, simply allowing zero rating capital gains taxes for public stock sales to ESOPs as is now the case with sales of privately held firms will jump start that sector. The best way to increase employee-ownership is a tax cut. 

The asset value added tax would be marked to market at initial public offering, option exercise and first sale after inheritance, gift or donation. Heirs can keep the farm or business as long as they operate it, but will face the same tax burdens at sale. This alternative is preferable to what is in the current President’s Budget.

Attachment: Opportunity Zones Video

Attachment: Ensuring Women Can Thrive Video

Attachment: Fiscal Year 2022 Budget

Attachment: Tax Reform (with videos attached)