Tag: federal budget
That $200 Billion Expenditure On Trump's Iran 'Excursion' Is Real Money

That $200 Billion Expenditure On Trump's Iran 'Excursion' Is Real Money

Most people have little understanding of what is big or small in the federal budget, in large part because the media have made a conscious decision to not inform people. Rather than taking ten seconds to indicate what share of the budget a particular item is, they just write huge numbers in the millions or billions, knowing they are completely meaningless to almost everyone who sees them.

With this in mind, I thought it would be useful to write a piece pointing out that the $200 billion (2.9 percent of the budget) Trump plans to ask to cover the cost of his war in Iran is, in fact, a big deal. While this is still less than what we spend on huge social programs like Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, it is far larger than most of the items that are subject of major political debates.

Just to mention a few, we can start with the fraud in Minnesota in social programs that the Justice Department has uncovered. To date, this comes to $250 million. Trump has claimed there is $19 billion in fraud, but Trump also has claimed he has arranged for $18 trillion in foreign investment into the country and that he will reduce drug prices by 1500 percent. Numbers don’t have the same meaning for Trump and his team as they do for the rest of us.

While it is likely that the total figure for fraud will go higher, it almost certainly is not the earth-shattering scandal that Team Trump has claimed. After all, a childcare center refusing to let a random clown with a camera crew film the kids is not evidence of fraud. Where there is money on the table, whether in the public or private sector, some will be misspent or stolen. Trump has chosen to make a big deal out of the fraud in Minnesota because at least some of it involves Somali immigrants, but that is evidence of Trump’s racism, not a massive fraud problem.

The next item is the $550 million in annual funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Trump apparently felt it was important to save taxpayers this money rather than helping to fund Big Bird and National Public Radio. This spending comes to a bit less than $4 a household.

Then we have the Biden childcare agenda that would have cost $42.4 billion a year. This set of proposals would have made childcare affordable for the vast majority of people in the country.

The last item for comparison is the extension of the enhanced Obamacare subsidies that was the basis for the government shutdown in the fall. This would cost roughly $27 billion for a single year.[1]

If you’re wondering where the bars are for the Minnesota fraud or funding for public broadcasting, I didn’t forget them. The bars are too small to be visible next to Trump’s Iran war budget. The childcare programs and Obamacare subsidies are visible, but an order of magnitude smaller than what Trump is asking for.

The point here is that the war is a really big deal in terms of the budget. The biggest impact is, of course, the lives lost and put in danger by the war. And the economic impact on the United States and world is enormous. But this is also a huge budget issue. It is the sort of expenditure that a president would ordinarily feel they have to make a serious case for and not just demand the money from Congress.

But I suppose Trump thinks that since his mandate was almost as large as Hillary Clinton’s in 2016, he has more authority than most presidents. Congress and the country need to bring some reality to this story.

[1] The sources for the chart are Corporation for Public Broadcasting, MN fraud https://www.kwtx.com/2026/01/02/everything-we-know-about-minnesotas-massive-fraud-schemes/ , Childcare proposal https://democrats-budget.house.gov/resources/fact-sheet/president-bidens-2025-budget-uplifts-families-and-children , and Obamacare subsidies https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2025-09/61734-Health.pdf.

Dean Baker is a senior economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research and the author of the 2016 book Rigged: How Globalization and the Rules of the Modern Economy Were Structured to Make the Rich Richer. Please consider subscribing to his Substack.

Reprinted with permission from Dean Baker.


Elon Musk

Musk Is Right, But He Too Is 'A Disgusting Abomination'

On Tuesday, after Elon Musk blasted out the screed below, a friend texted me: “I guess the worm has turned. Oh, wait, I guess that’s RFK.” Indeed. We don’t know exactly what set off this tweet and the series of whines that followed, but it may have been the ketamine talking.

Anyway, Musk happens to be right: The One Big Beautiful Bill Act — its actual name! — is indeed a disgusting abomination. But this is one of those cases where it takes one to know one. Few men have done as much damage out of sheer arrogance, ignorance and pettiness as Elon Musk. He has thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands, of deaths on his hands.

And even his parting blast is destructive, demonstrating that he has learned nothing from his abject failure as a policymaker. The OBBBA is terrible, but not at all for the reasons Musk claims.

There have been a number of articles about Musk’s departure that portray him as a “Mr. Smith goes to Washington” type, a well-intentioned naif thwarted by special interests. Gag me with a Cybertruck.

What actually happened was that a zillionaire who knew nothing about government marched in claiming that he could cut $2 trillion from the $6 trillion federal budget by eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse. This was obvious nonsense, but Musk has never showed any signs of being willing either to admit his mistakes or learn from them. The wild claims just kept coming, like his insistence that millions of dead people were getting Social Security.

Claims about budget savings by DOGE — the Musk-run not-actually-a-government department that has been running wild since Donald Trump took office — have rapidly shrunk over time. Still, DOGE has continued to put out “walls of receipts” purporting to document some of its achievements. Again and again, investigators going through these reports have found them full of ludicrous errors — the same canceled contract listed three times, an $8 million saving reported as $8 billion, and more.

Seriously, would any of Musk’s tech-bro friends have invested in a venture run by someone with such a record of making extravagant but completely unfilled promises, then following up with false claims of success?

Meanwhile, the Muskenjugend, the extremely young and utterly unqualified acolytes DOGE parachuted into government agencies, disrupted the federal government’s operations. In some cases they summarily fired crucial workers without making any effort to understand their jobs, while encouraging many others to take early retirement. Those workers who remained have found themselves devoting a lot of time and effort to justifying their existence rather than doing their jobs. And although it’s hard to quantify, the DOGE presumption that government workers are worthless unless proven otherwise must have done large damage to morale and efficiency. In the end, DOGE has almost surely increased the budget deficit.

The one area where DOGE really has managed to make big cuts is foreign aid, a very small part of the budget but one it has virtually shut down. The savings have been tiny, but the human impacts immense — as I said, thousands have died as a result of Musk’s actions, and many more will die in the future.

Aside from the special hostility Musk and co. seem to have toward helping the world’s poor, the big driver behind Musk’s whole role in Washington seems to have been the belief that the federal government is a bloated bureaucracy that wastes vast amounts of money. Yet Musk kept not being able to find all that waste. This is despite the fact that he had months to dig up the wasted billions, along with unprecedented, almost surely illegal, access to government data.

A better man might have said to himself, “Hmm. Maybe I was wrong. Maybe the federal government is actually a pretty well-functioning organization, with many workers trying to do their jobs well.”

But Musk isn’t that kind of man. In denouncing the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, he calls it a “pork-filled Congressional spending bill.” Hey, Elon, where’s the beef pork? You’ve spent months trying to find it, with basically zero success. And the reason this bill will explode the deficit is that savage cuts to Medicaid and food stamps aren’t enough to offset huge tax cuts for the rich.

Um, what cost savings? And what personal risks are we talking about?

In the end, Musk’s legacy will be a damaged federal government that has lost many of its best people and will have a hard time replacing them. Oh, and a lot of dead children.

In a just world Elon Musk wouldn’t be heading back to run Tesla. He would, instead, be retreating to a remote monastery somewhere, to spend the rest of his life in poverty and penance.

Reprinted with permission from Substack.

Donald Trump

Trump's Ban On 'Enemy' Law Firms Advances A More Efficient Fascism

Donald Trump is in the process of issuing a series of executive orders targeting law firms he doesn’t like. The orders strip partners and employees of the firms of their top-secret security clearances, bar the firms from doing business with the federal government, ban employees of the firms from federal office buildings, ban federal contractors from doing business with the firms, and initiate federal investigations of the firms for hiring and promoting people on the basis of race, gender, or sexual orientation.

Trump’s first order was against Covington & Burling, a firm that had done legal work for Jack Smith, the Special Counsel assigned to investigate Trump for his theft of top-secret national security documents and attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 election. He then went after the Perkins Coie law firm, which the New York Times identifies as being “aligned with Democrats.”

Trump then turned his attention to Paul Weiss Rifkind Wharton & Garrison, signing an executive order with the same restrictions on the firm, saying that one of the lawyers for the firm had worked as a prosecutor in New York on the indictment of Trump in the Stormy Daniels hush money case, and that another lawyer had been involved in a lawsuit against January 6 insurrectionists. The order against Paul Weiss similarly forbade the firm from doing business with the federal government, barred any of its clients from federal contracts, and stripped the firm’s access to federal facilities.

The most egregious paragraph in the executive orders against the law firms was the one entitled “Personnel:”

“The heads of all agencies shall, to the extent permitted by law, provide guidance limiting official access from [sic] Federal Government buildings to employees of Perkins Coie when such access would threaten the national security of or otherwise be inconsistent with the interests of the United States. In addition, the heads of all agencies shall provide guidance limiting Government employees acting in their official capacity from engaging with Perkins Coie employees to ensure consistency with the national security and other interests of the United States.”

In essence, what this paragraph does is accuse the law firms’ leadership and employees of disloyalty to the United States, because everything they're being banned from belongs to the United States government. That's where the words “national security” come from. The nation's security is defended by the government. The implication is that if any of the law firms’ employees come in contact with government buildings or personnel, that contact would be a threat to national security, so it must be forbidden.

No evidence is cited for this outrageous allegation. There is nothing in the rest of the language of the executive orders to support why any of the law firms or their employees would be such a threat. Lacking that evidence, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that the disloyalty of the law firms and their employees is to Donald Trump, not to the nation. This is just rank unsupported prejudice.

Perkins Coie did not take the ban lying down, immediately suing in federal court on the basis that the executive order was unconstitutional. Judge Beryl Howell issued a temporary restraining order forbidding the enforcement of the executive order. The Trump DOJ then moved in the D.C. Court of Appeals to get the judge disqualified. This was after the Trump administration had filed another appeal trying to disqualify Judge James Boasberg from hearing the case involving the deportation of more than 100 Venezuelan migrants on the basis that they belong to a drug gang.

So not only is Trump banning entire law firms from going into court against the administration, he is attempting to convince the D.C. Court of Appeals to get two well regarded federal judges with long experience banned from hearing cases against Trump and his administration.

What Trump has done is to make it impossible for these law firms to do business with the federal government, to file lawsuits against the federal government, or take clients who had business with the federal government. They must be able to do research, interview witnesses, and gather evidence if they're going to sue the federal government or defend anyone against charges brought by the Department of Justice. So, if you represent, say, Lockheed Martin, you wouldn't have any access to the Pentagon where the company's contracts for the F-35 fighter were written. If you represent a contractor who worked on a naval vessel like an aircraft carrier or a submarine, you wouldn't be able to enter a naval base where those ships are located, or interview anyone involved in the building or contracting for naval vessels.

This is the meat and potatoes of what lawyers do. Take away the right of employees from these law firms to walk into federal buildings, access federal documents, and review documents or interview anyone on any subject involving secrets and national security, and you're taking away the lifeblood of their business.

The Paul Weiss firm quickly made a deal with Trump promising to do $40 million worth of pro bono work for the White House. The White House issued a statement saying that the firm had “acknowledged the wrongdoing of its former partner Mark Pomerantz,” and had committed to ending its program of diversity, equity, and inclusion in hiring and promotion.

In other words, the Paul Weiss law firm caved into Trump's demands so that security clearances held by its employees could be retained and the business the firm and its clients do with the federal government would not be damaged.

What Trump is doing with his assault on major law firms by executive order smacks of what Adolf Hitler did in the 1930s when he brought the entire legal profession and judicial system of Germany to heel by barring Jewish lawyers and judges from the German courts and forbidding Jewish lawyers from doing business with the German government.

This is from an article published by the Federal Bar Association titled “Lawyers and Bar Associations Play a Vital Role in Preserving the Rule of Law: A Study of How Hitler Perverted Germany’s Judicial System Highlights the Importance of Lawyers.”

“Hitler’s early decree stripping Jewish lawyers and judges of their professional capacities marked an early step in the decline from liberty to dictatorship. According to research conducted by the German Federal Bar and documented in its exhibit, “Lawyers without Rights: Jewish Lawyers under the Third Reich,” Hitler’s 1933 decree barring Jewish lawyers and judges from German courts did not trigger any formal protests or objections from non-Jewish lawyers or judges. There were many respected bar associations in Germany, but they did not oppose this action.”

The only difference here is that Trump is not starting with a religious minority, but with a minority of law firms and a minority of judges handling cases against the Trump administration. He knows that if he can knock down one or two big time law firms and manage to bar several of the judges hearing lawsuits against his administration from hearing the cases before them, he will have the entire legal profession and judiciary intimidated into falling in line.

This is the way fascism starts, with the few not the many, but the many are next. Today it's law firms barred from government buildings and judges barred from hearing lawsuits. Tomorrow it could be individual citizens barred from appealing decisions about their taxes or Social Security because Trump doesn't like the political party they belong to or the demonstration they attended or the club they joined in college. Today it's alleged drug dealers rounded up without charges and banned from the country.

Tomorrow it could be you and me.

Lucian K. Truscott IV, a graduate of West Point, has had a 50-year career as a journalist, novelist, and screenwriter. He has covered Watergate, the Stonewall riots, and wars in Lebanon, Iraq, and Afghanistan. He is also the author of five bestselling novels. He writes every day at luciantruscott.substack.com and you can follow him on Bluesky @lktiv.bsky.social and on Facebook at Lucian K. Truscott IV. Please consider subscribing to his Substack.

Reprinted with permission from Lucian Truscott Newsletter


Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Corona Virus

Trending

World