Showing posts with label Bureaucracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bureaucracy. Show all posts

20 March 2026

Some Quick, Ill Developed, Political Ideas

In defense of the deep state

The "deep state" is valuable and good, not a conspiratorial anti-democratic force. It is the bureaucratic manifestation of the rule of law.

We say we live in a "democracy" but that's an oversimplification. Obeying the law is not a matter up for popular vote. When we say we are a democracy what we really mean is that changes in the law must be made democratically. Not even the President is allowed to deviate from the law, which the President is sworn to faithfully execute. The President, wearing a different hat, can participate in the legislative process. But the bureaucratic organization that is the state can and normatively should push back against a President who tries to deviate from the way that the law mandates that the organization should behave.

Fiscal federalism

Trump 2.0 has illustrated the perils of relying too heavily on the federal budgetary process to spend funds for public purposes. So have many past government shutdowns.

Of course, dysfunction in the federal budgetary process leaves undisturbed public functions funded and operated at the state and local level with state and local funding. Most law enforcement comes from state and local law enforcement, most court cases (criminal and civil) are handled in the state courts, most K-12 and higher education funding is state and local, most roads and bridges are maintained at the state and local level, state and local law and funding keeps the water running, the sewers flowing, clears away trash from homes and businesses, and regulates the construction industry and real estate development for the most part.

We've seen what happens when this falls apart now. Because Medicaid and VA Health Care are federally funded and don't even had dedicated federal tax funding, they can be undermined quickly when the federal budgetary process goes astray and also equalize services between poor states and rich states. A simple federal tax law change can undermine ACA individual health insurance marketplace subsidies. K-12 education relies heavily on federal funding for special education (i.e. educating the disabled) and for schools in low income areas (which also equalizes situations between poor states and rich states). Higher education relies upon federal funding for grants for low income students, higher educational institutions for military officers and the deaf, student loan financing, and research grants. Disaster relief is heavily federally funded and leaves havoc unchecked when that is suspended. Disease control and weather prediction and monitoring are also heavily federally funded and are screwed up when this changes.

While we couldn't fund the military or the national debt at the state and local level, we could have a system where more health care and education spending is state and local. This would reduce federal influence on how those industries run and remove those industries from the whims of the federal budget process to a great extent, but would also lead to weaker subsidies of poor states and disproportionately worse services in poor states and would subject those services to greater state and local political influence.

After 9-11 we federalized airport security creating the TSA. Today, we see the political price of that as a federal budgetary process fight unrelated to the TSA itself disrupts airport service. Early in Trump 2.0 we saw what happened to FAA air traffic control as a result of exposure to the Trump 2.0 administration and the federal budgetary process.

So far, Social Security is only suffering deficiencies in administrative processing of disability claims for the most part, because it has its own dedicated funding source that insulates it from the federal budgetary process as an entitlement.

But national parks and major transportation ad energy infrastructure programs have seen a twirl.

Could we build a more robust system without facing too many costs?

02 September 2025

Moving Space Force HQ From Colorado To Alabama Is Stupid

Trump is about to renew his efforts to move the headquarters of the Space Force, a fifth military service that he created, from Colorado (where the headquarters of the part of the Air Force bureaucracy that was transferred to the separate Space Force service was located before he created the Space Force), to Alabama. He tried to do so during his first term, but the moved got bogged down in Department of Defense red tape, and the Department of Defense reversed that decision during the Biden Administration. 

UPDATE:

President Trump said one of the main considerations for moving Space Command out of Colorado Springs is because Colorado voters largely vote by mail. 
“I will say I want to thank Colorado,” Trump said. “The problem I have with Colorado… they do mail-in voting, they went to all mail-in voting, so they have automatically crooked elections." 
Trump has long criticized voting by mail, and has cited the practice as a major reason he lost the 2020 election to Biden though he has not provided evidence of fraud emanating from mail-in ballots." . . . 
The Denver Metro Chamber of Commerce estimates that Space Command supports nearly 1,400 jobs and has a $1 billion impact on the Colorado Springs economy. Colorado has a significant Space Force presence, hosting half the bases with its major operations, including Peterson as well as Schriever Space Force Base in the Colorado Springs area and Buckley Space Force Base in Aurora. Nationally, the branch has more than 14,000 military and civilian members, who are called Guardians. 

Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser on Tuesday said his office was prepared to challenge in court Trump’s decision to move the command, though he did not elaborate the legal rationale for a lawsuit. . . . 
Huntsville, nicknamed Rocket City, has long been home to Redstone and NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center. The Army’s Space and Missile Defense Command is also located in Huntsville, which drew its nickname because of its role in building the first rockets for the U.S. space program.

This is almost certainly not a legitimate reason for executive branch action under the Administrative Procedure Act. It is also an outrageously false claim.

Colorado Pols has more details.

END UPDATE

This is very on brand for Trump. He is making a call that places partisan politics above what is best for national security and wastes federal dollars.

Alabama is less attractive than Colorado to the civilian employees and contractors (who have a choice unlike active duty service members), so it won't attract the same quality work force. And, if one was going to move it away from Colorado one could have justified an HQ in Florida or Texas, which are also GOP strongholds, but like Colorado and Washington State, actually have a space industry (but see the material in the update above about Huntsville). Charitably, the best that can be said for it is that it provides economic development assistance to an underdeveloped part of the U.S.A. that supports him politically. Less charitably, it can be seen as a political payoff to Senator Tommy Tuberville who was getting in the way of Trump's Defense Department agenda. Less charitably still, it is a way for Trump to try to take action solely attributable to him that will become part of a military service's legacy once the bad decisions that went into that choice are long forgotten.

Tearing down old infrastructure to move it somewhere else is also just wasteful, while providing no benefits to national security. It is will probably require a billion or so dollars of unnecessary defense spending.

Of course, creating the "Space Force" was a bone headed idea in the first place. It undermines interservice cooperation, and honestly, it would have been better to be truly conservative and roll the Air Force back into the Army, rather than further dividing the Air Force. There might be a time when a Space Force makes sense, but that time is far in future.

Space Force's military role remains ill-defined and it remains a work in progress that is currently creating more confusion rather than a stronger U.S. military. Do we really need a new Space Force academy? Do we really need Space Force reserves? How is it doing anything that the Air Force did better? How many people are even in the Space Force? According to Google AI it apparently has 9,400 active duty "guardians" and about 4,600 civilians, making it far smaller than even the Coast Guard.

Trump's other wasteful symbolic military acts

Trump's other symbolic military initiatives are similarly dubious. His military birthday parade in the District of Columbia on June 14, that the Army aptly converted to a boring historical display from the third-world dictatorship show of force that he wanted in an act of malicious compliance, it was a wasteful and expensive flop.

The idea he has floated to change the name of the Department of Defense to the Department of War (as it was called during and before World War II), were also wastes of money, but at least are basically harmless. Indeed, the calling it the Department of War is also more honest.

Trump's intent to reassign Confederate names to U.S. military bases is fundamentally endorsing treason and insurrection and is patently un-American.

Trump's inappropriate domestic uses of the military

Trump's deployment of military force, mostly but not entirely, national guard troops, on the other hand, in addition to being a waste of money, are grossly improper, manufactured crises that threaten democracy, undermine federalism, are inappropriate for immigration enforcement, and are illegal.

The Courts rejected his efforts to criminalize illegal immigration by calling a large swath of the border a military base, and have rejected his characterization of illegal immigration as an "invasion" of the United States for constitutional purposes. Courts have also held that deportation flights he had the military make in violation of court orders were illegal.

Courts have shut down his military deployments to Los Angeles. As the New York Times explains:
A federal judge in California said President Trump broke the law by deploying roughly 5,000 Marines and National Guard troops to Los Angeles in June in response to immigration protests. The judge said on Tuesday that Mr. Trump, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the Defense Department had violated the Posse Comitatus Act, which generally prohibits using the military to enforce domestic law. The judge barred them from using the troops for any law-enforcement purpose, but put the order on hold for 10 days. The administration is expected to appeal. . . . 
The ruling was the latest in a series of judicial battles over claims of expansive unilateral powers by the administration. Mr. Trump and administration officials have deported people without due process, imposed widespread and unpopular tariffs and rolled back energy regulations, citing wartime and emergency powers that have been disputed in federal court. 
The president also declared crime in Washington, D.C., to be an emergency in order to send federal troops there in August, although crime rates in the nation’s capital have actually been falling and local officials said the deployment was not needed. Since then, Mr. Trump has publicly mused about sending the National Guard into other Democratic-led cities. Federal law gives the White House more latitude to conduct local law enforcement in the District of Columbia than in the states. . . .
The ruling places strict limits on the what the troops can do and applies only in California, although the judge noted that Mr. Trump and Mr. Hegseth “have stated their intention” to use Guard troops as a “national police force with the president as its chief.” Gov. Gavin Newsom of California praised the decision, saying Mr. Trump’s efforts were “illegal, authoritarian, and must be stopped in every courtroom across this country.”

Other bad defense department decisions.

These aren't the only bad defense department decisions he's made. He's banned books at the military academies (eventually rescinding all but a few of those bans). 

He wiped all mention of women and minorities who contributed to the U.S. military on government websites (another decision he has mostly backed down from in the face of court action and bad P.R.). 

He's systemically fired or removed from command women and minorities whom he has called "DEI hires" while putting in place less qualified individuals chosen for political loyalty. 

He's baselessly fired transgender troops contrary to their civil rights and denied them their legitimate benefits for being laid off and having served with distinction.

He's purged the ranks of generals and admirals and national intelligence officials to replace them with political loyalists. Trump's major appointments in the defense and national intelligence sectors have involved woefully unqualified people who have made major public blunders.

His openly revenge oriented revocations of security clearances and security details for various officials has been disgraceful.

The mixed bag of Trump's military deployments and threats abroad.

Trump's deployment of U.S. forces have been a mixed bag at best.

Trump wasn't wrong to continue Biden's policy of militarily engaging the Iranian backed Houthi rebels in Yemen who have been using advanced anti-ship missiles from Iran to interrupt maritime commerce in acts of piracy that they claim are in support of Gaza but really have nothing to do with it. But then, he just lost interest and ended U.S. involvement.

Trump wasn't wrong to provide some extra military support to Israel's raids on Iran to thwart its nuclear capabilities, although the B-2 bomber strikes he made were less effective than might have been hoped. And, of course, this is a problem of his own making created when he pulled the U.S. out of President Obama's deal with Iran to end its nuclear weapons program.

Trump, in his first term, set up Biden for failure, and the Afghan government installed by the U.S. and its allies for collapse, by negotiating with the Taliban for a U.S. withdrawal that left the Afghan government out of the loop and left Biden holding the bag when he took office, just a month or so before the scheduled pull out date. And, in his second term, Trump has broken faith with Afghan citizens who served U.S. forces in Afghanistan at great risk to their own lives by trying to revoke the immigration protections that the Biden Administration and his own administration in his first term provided to them.

Trump has been indecisive, has wrecked our alliances, has taken absurd and counterfactual positions, and has played into Russia's hand with respect to the Ukraine War, even though with immense bipartisan political pressure from Congress and from the Defense Department, he hasn't entirely abandoned it.

Trump's utter abandonment of Africa, ending U.S. Aid in a way that has killed hundreds of thousands of people and will kill millions, planning to close all U.S. embassies there, and imposing tariffs upon it, has basically ceded the entire continent to China.

Trump has been less firm than he might have been in the Philippines-China clashes in the South China Sea caused by Chinese Coast Guard harassment of Filipino military and civilian shipping in places that international law has declared to be international waters.

Trump's response to the situation in Israel with Gaza has ranged from rudderless to absurd with his call to vacate Gaza and turn it into a Trump owned beach resort. By floating the proposal without even consulting his advisors, he has undermined U.S. credibility on the issue.

Trump's deployment of naval forces towards Venezuela seems to be an attempt to manufacture a war. His early threats to invade Greenland and Panama and Mexico, contrary to the sovereignty of a NATO member, to treaty obligations, and to international law, and to annex Canada, have likewise been toddler level moves that have undermined U.S. credibility in foreign affairs and turned us into a global menace.

The mixed bag of Trump's procurement decisions

Trump's military procurement decisions have also been a mixed bag.

The cancelation of the M10 Booker light tank (that the Army refused to call a tank) was a good move. Cancelling the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle for the Army (one of the best procurement decisions that the Army and Marine Corps have made for ages), while keeping the Army's buy of the obviously bad Infantry Squad Vehicle that ignores all of the lessons the Army learned in Iraq and Afghanistan was a very bad move.

Cancelling the Army's successor to the M113 was mostly a good move, but leaves the Army without a next generation medical transport and field hospital vehicle, even though other parts of that buy were unwise. Progress on an Osprey-like tilt wing successor to the Blackhawk helicopter in the Army is positive. Upgrading Army small arms makes sense.

The decision to boost purchases of the B-21 Raider and the F-47 Air Force fighter (to replace the F-35A) aren't horrible decisions, nor is the decision to continue the Collaborative Combat Aircraft (a.k.a. Loyal Wingman drone) program. Looking at ways to use cargo aircraft as bombers or missile launching platforms also makes sense. This administration's continued failure to recognize the need to have a close air support aircraft (shared with past administrations), however, even if the A-10 is just too old, wasn't wise. Trump's absurd attempt to play aerospace engineer and claim that the F-47 really needs twin engines, however, is more toddler level governance.

A focus on improving U.S. air defenses in a program known as the Golden Dome (playing on Israel's Iron Dome), on ramping up U.S. drone production, and on rushing to get drone defense resources fielded aren't wrong. Developing hypersonic missiles also makes sense. 

Developing new anti-ship tactical nuclear missiles, however, is a bad call and doesn't meet a real military need since existing anti-ship missiles are more than adequate to sink any ship in existence.

The decision to fund development of Elon Musk's SpaceX Rocket Cargo program which is technologically challenging, doesn't have a proven track record of quality control, and doesn't meet an urgent need, is less wise. This contract is just political payback.

It is honestly still hard to tell, more than seven months into the administration, what it's naval policy is. The Navy is appropriately looking at a major increase in unmanned ships and submarines, and at containerized anti-ship missiles for ships that wouldn't ordinarily have any missiles. Is the successor to the F-35C on or off? Is the Constellation class frigate on or off? Where is the Littoral Combat Ship program? Do we really need more old model Arleigh Burke destroyers? Does spending big bucks on maintaining a large scale amphibious attack capability really make sense?

Trump has talked big about using the U.S. military against cartels in Latin America, but the Department of Defense has apparently done nothing to prepare for this historically law enforcement and Coast Guard mission.

09 July 2025

Midweek Rants And Observations

* It was 101ยบ F today in Denver. Fortunately, we have a brand new swamp cooler, so this is survivable. I'm honestly a little surprised that our power stayed on. We've had two power outs for more than an hour each on hot afternoons in the last few weeks.

* My office suite is having a potluck next week. There was a sign up sheet for names and what you are bringing. A majority of people who signed up said they were bringing "TBD". Suck it up my office neighbors. Commit to something.

* Why does it take the City of Denver weeks for a deed that is recorded and digitally processed by the Clerk & Recorder's office weeks to be reflected in the Assessor's Office records?

* A recent new report stated:

Church stands by call to execute gay people: “I will not apologize for preaching the Word of God.”: A men's night sermon said gay people should "blow yourself in the back of the head."
Just what I would expect a Baptist church in Indiana to say. The most vile people in America are Christians.

"Not all Christians are this bad" you say? Then why aren't they picketing outside the steps of this church for heresy and blasphemy? It isn't my place to do that. Not my monkeys, not my circus. But it is hard to take any Christians seriously when this isn't the instant and vigorous response of Christians who say they're wrong.

* There is a tornado warning in Washington D.C. right now. WTF?

* There are too many crazy people in this country, and not just in the White House.
A group that calls itself an anti-government militia told News 9 it’s “absolutely” targeting Oklahoma weather radars, claiming they control the weather. The warning comes just days after a vandal knocked out News 9’s live radar.

* I don't doubt for a minute that the allegations of this complaint, which was later dismissed (not on the merits), were true:

May be an image of text

* The people who leave anti-immigration comments on social media posts and news story (and there are lots of them) are among the most vile people you'll see on the Internet. These people would have been pro-Holocaust, pro-segregation, pro-slavery, and pro-witch burning.

It is a reminder that the evil that is Donald Trump runs deep. There are there millions, if not tens of millions of these monsters in the United States.

Stupid hurts people. But this level of vile goes far beyond that. They are as bad as the most culpable violent criminals in our prisons. Where do these people come from? What can we do about them?

* It just doesn't stop.


* Anti-aging, life extension drugs are a real possibility, if not in my lifetime, in the lives of my children.

A simple monthly injection allows mice to live 25% longer and free from diseases: The strategy — the injection of a simple antibody — has already begun to be tested in humans in an attempt to cure age-related illnesses.

* The Texas floods have are already the fourth most deadly floods in Texas history. There are still 161 people missing, so they could easily rise to #2, and floods in San Antonio are ongoing.

May be an image of text that says 'FOX4 STORM 1900 GALVESTON DEADLIEST FLOODS TEXAS DEATHTOLL DEATH TOLL 12,000* 220 1921 SAN ANTONIO 1913 SAN ANTONIO 2025 2025TEXAS TEXAS 180 HARVEY 2017 109* 68' 

Most of these deaths were preventable. The part of Texas hit has consistently had the highest concentration of flood deaths in the United States since the 1930s. State and local officials rejected a proposal in 2017, in the wake of Hurricane Harvey, to install flood detection devices and warning sirens but weren't willing to spend the money to do so. Trump's cuts to NOAA and the National Weather Service impaired the warning that people at risk in the flood received. Trump gutted FEMA which only started to take action to help 72 hours after the floods when it was already too late (the U.S. Coast Guard, in fairness, stepped in anyway and saved about 165 lives at the insistence of a brave rookie over the indifference and waffling of his supervisors). The Texas Governor and its top emergency response official have urged Trump to cut or eliminate FEMA.

* Gun homicides are down, but gun suicides have reached a record high.

The CDC reports 27,300 gun suicides in 2023, constituting 58% of all gun deaths, a record high. Wyoming led the nation with about 19.9 gun suicide deaths per 100,000 residents — nearly 10 times the rate of Massachusetts, which had the lowest at about 2.1 per 100,000.
Gun homicides fell for the second year in a row, dropping from 20,958 in 2021 to 19,651 in 2022 and 17,927 in 2023. Despite the decline, the 2023 total ranks as the fifth highest on record for gun homicides.

16 May 2025

How Should The U.S. Military Be Organized?

Background

The U.S. military is primarily divided into five services: the Army, the Air Force (which was split off from the Army after World War II), the Space Force (which was split off from the Air Force during Trump's first term), the Navy, and the Marines (which are a separate military service within the Department of the Navy). 

Each of these services has (or will have once it is set up, in the case of the Space Force) a reserve component that consists mostly of recently retired active duty service members who train on a part-time basis and can be called up to serve if there is a shortage of active duty personnel.

In addition to the federally operated reserves for each service, each U.S. state has an Army National Guard and an Air Force National Guard, staffed mostly by part-time citizen soldiers (the normal obligation is one weekend a month and one week a year, when not called up for an emergency). Normally, these forces report to the state governor and are called up for disaster relief and to deal with potential "insurrections" and civil unrest, for example, to enforce court orders that local civilian law enforcement is disregarding in an organized resistance. The national guard can also be called up to serve by the President as basically temporary active duty military service members when needed.

In addition, a sixth service, the Coast Guard, which used to be part of the Department of Transportation and is now part of the Department of Homeland Security, is a civilian law enforcement and first responder organization in peace time, can be placed under the command of the Navy in wartime and is organized in a paramilitary fashion.

There are also several independent agencies, some within the Department of Defense, and some outside it, that have national security duties. These include the NSA (which handles electronic surveillance and code breaking), the NRO (which handles spy satellites), the CIA (which gathers and analyzes covert and open source intelligence for both foreign policy and military purposes and also conducts covert military-style operations), DARPA (which does bleeding edge research and development for the military that isn't immediately actionable in a specific procurement project), the Selective Service system (which keeps the infrastructure in place to conscript new soldiers if Congress decides to do so), and more.

Observations

One of the problems with the status quo is that coordination between military services has to be arranged at a very high level of the Department of Defense bureaucracy, which creates bureaucratic friction in arranging joint exercises that use the resources of multiple services acting together in the same military operation, and discourages individual services from prioritizing the support that they provide to other military services in their resource allocation and procurement and military equipment systems development.

For example, the Air Force is supposed to be in charge of providing air support and logistics support to the Army, but it tends to deprioritize these missions in favor of air to air fighters designed to secure air superiority and long range bombers. The Army meanwhile, since it is allowed to have helicopters, pushes helicopters into transport and close air support missions even when fixed wing aircraft would have been better suited to those missions, because it wants to control the air power upon which its units rely.

Similarly, the Navy is responsible for delivering Army soldiers to war on transport ships and for providing fire support for Army and Marine soldiers from sea. But it has tended to neglect these missions (and more generally littoral operations) in favor of building up its blue sea surface and submarine fleet. Unlike the Army, however, the Navy and Marine Corps have been allowed to have fixed wing aircraft under their own command and control, and have, as a result, keep their use of helicopters mostly restricted to missions where they are actually preferable to fixed wing aircraft.

The U.S. military has tended to treat the national guard is just a second layer of reserve military force rather than seeing it as its own division of the military with its own distinct purpose that calls for different kinds of training, military equipment, and tactics.

The current structure also creates an incentive for each of the military services to focus its force design on engaging with the most capable "peer" and "near peer" military adversaries that require the most advanced and powerful military weapons and vehicles without regard to cost-effectiveness, because these kinds of conflicts amount of existential threats in which money is no object.

As a result, the U.S. military is ill designed to engage military adversaries less capable than "near peers" in a way that isn't expensive overkill. It can win this engagements, but at a price that makes fighting them so unsustainable that it puts pressure on leaders to abandon them. 

Among the sub-near peer adversaries and missions that the U.S. military is ill suited to engage in a cost effectively are counter-insurgency missions where the insurgents have limited access to military grade weapons other than small arms, anti-piracy missions, interdiction and anti-smuggling missions, peace keeping, intercepting a handful of rogue aircraft (short of an invasion with large numbers of military aircraft) in U.S. airspace, and humanitarian relief missions following disasters. Yet, a significant share of the missions that the U.S. military has historically been called upon to perform fit in these categories.

Proposal

* The Army National Guard, Air Force National Guard, and Coast Guard should be recognized as a separate military service that is focused upon homeland defense and emergency response, and should be called up into active duty service abroad only when the capabilities developed for those roles are needed.

Thus, the Army National Guard should be weighted more heavily towards air defense and drone defense, should have specialized equipment tailored to emergency response in low to moderate threat environments, and should largely divest itself of tanks and artillery. The Air Force National Guard shouldn't have bomber aircraft that have no appropriate mission within the U.S., should have cost effective non-stealth, fast but sub-sonic, lightly armed fighters to intercept rogue aircraft, and should increase its investment in search and rescue and transport and fire fighting aircraft. The Coast Guard should have resources for defending the U.S. from a coastal invasion (including diesel-electric coastal submarines), and the Army and Air Force National Guards in border states should have resources calibrated to land invasions from Canada and Mexico.

The final tier of the missile defense "golden dome" system that has been proposed designed to intercept income missiles and drones once they have gotten close to U.S. territory should also be a national guard function.

The Army Corps of Engineers might also be fruitfully relocated to this service.

* The U.S. nuclear weapons force intended as a deterrent force, made up of U.S. ballistic missile submarines, U.S. nuclear weapon carrying aircraft, and ground based nuclear weapons, should be part of a separate "strategic defense service", which is also responsible for intercepting incoming long range missile attacks near the point of launch and in mid-flight.

The remainder of the U.S. military should be divided into two services. 

* One military service would be devoted to addressing military confrontations with "peer" and "near peer" countries like China and Russia and Iran and North Korea with advanced, expensive, military grade weapons, including surface combatant ships, attack submarines, advanced fighter and bomber aircraft, and heavy army weapons. 

This would allow better coordination of resources that is discouraged by inter-service rivalries and lack of communication, such as balancing anti-ship and anti-submarine warfare missions between fixed wing aircraft historically in the Air Force (which are currently under utilized for that mission), surface combatants, submarines, and intermediate and long range missiles deployed by ground forces in the Army and Marines. It would also elevate the importance of missions to transport troops and their supplies. 

* The other military service would be devoted to proportionately and efficiently addressing sub-near peer military conflicts like counterinsurgency missions, peace keeping, anti-piracy missions, anti-smuggling operations abroad interdicting merchant grade ships trying to bust embargoes and international sanctions, embassy defense, evacuations of U.S. nationals and allies from areas were warfare has broken out in which the U.S. is not a party, and wars with countries that lack advanced military capabilities (like many countries in Latin America and Africa). This force would have a very different set of aircraft, ships, military ground vehicles, force design, and training.

* There would also be a paramilitary service, perhaps officially housed in the Department of State rather than the Department of Defense, that would be in charge of international relief missions that might have units specialized in disaster response, search and rescue, oil spill response, providing relief aid, setting up emergency shelters, deploying mobile field hospitals, and so on.

14 May 2025

Sanctioning And Preventing Federal Government Corruption

Emoluments And Other Standing Problems
The law is very clear. And, it is the highest possible law - a part of the United States Constitution. But, enforcing it, particularly in the case of a President who violates it, by any means short of an impeachment, which can be circumvented by 34 Senators of the President's political party, is another thing.

The U.S. Supreme Court's rules on standing to sue takes the position that you can't have standing to sue as a taxpayer, as a U.S. citizen, or as a voter, on a wrong that affects everyone in the same way.

The U.S. Supreme Court recently held that the President is immune from criminal liability for his official acts, no matter how egregious (in a stark deviation from the widespread understanding at the time it ruled this way), in addition to being immune from lawsuits seeking money damages for his official acts.

Justice Department policy, and the structure of the Executive Branch also prevent federal prosecutors from prosecuting a sitting President, and the President's authority over the Justice Department, together with his pardon power, allows the President to shield anyone he favors from federal criminal prosecutions.

The U.S. Supreme Court hasn't directly ruled on the issue, but at least one lower court (in the criminal case against Trump involving his refusal to turn over documents with government nuclear secrets which he kept in his residence after he left office and refused to return upon demand) has held that special prosecutor statutes are unconstitutional, in an extension of the (until recently fringe) "unitary executive theory."

The same problem does not arise to nearly the same extent in state government. Almost every U.S. state has an independently elected state attorney general who can prosecute misconduct in other parts of the state government, and the federal government can also step in to prosecute state and local government corruption and violations of civil rights as a federal offense. The subject-matter jurisdiction of state courts is also not subject to the same level of strict limitations as the federal courts are by Article III of the U.S. Constitution.

This problem isn't unique to the Emoluments clause either. It comes up frequently in Establishment clause violations of the First Amendment. It can come up when one part of the federal government illegally shares confidential information with another part of the federal government. It comes up when the executive branch spends federal government money without a Congressional appropriation to support it. It comes up when a President orders a violation of the Posse Comitatus Act and then pardons anyone who was involved in it. And, there are many other contexts where serious violations of the law within the executive branch have no viable remedy.

In some cases, an entire house of Congress can, by majority vote, authorize a lawsuit against the Executive Branch in federal court, but this is cumbersome and rendered frequently ineffectual by partisan politics. In some cases, a federal government chartered corporation, like the Public Broadcasting Corporation, can have independent standing to sue and by sued under a statutory grant of federal authority.

But, there is no systemic solution to this problem in existing federal law. Mostly, we just have to trust the President to do the right thing, but not all Presidents have earned this trust, and certainly, our current President has not. This is a glaring flaw in American Public Law.

Solutions

There are plausible solutions which could be imagined that would set aside the usual rules of standing on the grounds of necessity. We could grant the federal courts the authority to deputize a special prosecutor to pursue these issues. We could grant standing to pursue these issues to state attorneys-general. We could allow Congress to create an independent agency (perhaps one located in the judicial or the legislative branch with no Presidentially appointed directors or board members from an organizational chart and constitutional perspective) to pursue these claims. We could vest this authority in former U.S. Presidents who are still living, or the candidate that was the runner up in the last Presidential election.

Possible Constitutional Amendments

Perhaps we need an "anti-corruption" constitutional amendment, although conceptually, maybe this could be broken into several components. Consider this package to six constitutional amendments (and to be clear, some of those could also be accomplished without constitutional amendments):

Anti-Corruption And Standing Amendment

* Create an agency that has standing to take criminal, and civil legal action with national effect), to enforce federal law, to render advisory ethics opinions, and to protect the rule of law within the federal government (perhaps with a director appointed by a governing board made up of federal judges chosen at random),
* Prohibit federal elected officials from having a role in, or knowledge of, the management of private businesses or investments while in office,
* Prohibit self-dealing and conflicts of interest by federal officials including the President,
* Prohibit felons from serving as President unless that disability is removed by the same means as an insurrection disability is removed,
* Prohibit members of Congress from serving while serving a sentence for a felony,
* Authorize removal of members of Congress without being formally expelled from office by the House where someone is a member by the courts for various grounds established by law constituting good cause,
* Expressly authorize the appointment of special prosecutors by a three U.S. District Court judge panel, where the Justice Department is conflicted, or where the federal government fails to prosecute a crime when a preponderance of evidence, beyond mere probable cause, shows that it was committed by the proposed defendant,
* Authorize facial challenges to the constitutionality of legislation and regulations by the anti-corruption agency and by state attorneys-general, even in the absence of a case or controversy or other proof of standing,
* Create standing to enforce the establishment clause by any person who resides in, or is detained by, the territory of a government that is alleged to have violated it,
* Expand the scope of grounds for impeachment to include a willful and persistent failure to faithfully execute the laws in violation of one's oath of office, or a willful defiance of a court order.
* Try impeachments before a panel of judges rather than by the U.S. Senate,
* Prohibit judges appointed by a President from serving as a judge in any court proceeding in which the appointing President is a party in a non-official capacity (including any criminal prosecution),
* Mandate that Congress pass appropriate legislation to thwart judge shopping,
* Create binding ethics rules for the U.S. Supreme Court and lower courts that can be enforced without utilizing the impeachment power by state attorneys-general, but some minority percentage of Senators, or by an anti-corruption agency, and
* Provide additional remedies for courts when federal government officials disobey court orders (including the permanent removal of an official from office, and the appointment of a special master to carry out the duties of the defiant official).

Immunity Amendment

* Overrule the U.S. Supreme Court's recent Presidential immunity ruling creating blanket immunity from criminal prosecution for a President's official acts,
* Forfeit immunity from civil lawsuits for money damages for acts that an official has been legally adjudicated to have committed in a criminal case or civil proceeding,
* Allow immunity from civil or criminal liability for federal government officials exclusively when Congress authorizes it by law, including, but not limited to Presidential immunity and qualified immunity for law enforcement,
* Prohibit stripping all courts of the authority to consider any matter,
* Narrow the political questions doctrine, and
* Make clear that there is no immunity from contempt of court liability.

Anti-Tyranny Amendment

* Impose limitations on the prosecution of state and local government officials by federal officials while they are performing their official duties (perhaps limiting such prosecutions to the anti-corruption agency),
* Make the Posse Comitatus Act a matter of self-executing constitutional law and to allow its enforcement in civil actions as well as by criminal prosecutions,
* Provide a self-executing, federal, private cause of action for compensatory, economic and non-economic damages including litigation costs and attorneys fees and/or injunctive relief, for any deprivation of federal rights constitutional or statutory, under color of state or federal law, against the government under whose authority or actions or inactions the deprivation was made, on a strict liability basis without regard to the intent of the government or governmental agents or employees doing so, and with no form of immunity (in a matter akin to the takings clause),
* Provide an absolute right to have criminal convictions vacated upon a showing of actual innocence by a preponderance of the evidence,
* Create a right to counsel in deportation actions and to bring habeas corpus petitions,
* Remove the "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" (which applies only to a handful of children of diplomats anyway) and "Indians not taxed" provision (which was legislatively mooted in 1924) from the grant of birthright citizenship in the 14th Amendment,
* Prohibit criminal defamation laws,
* Prohibit laws barring travel from one state to another in order for the person doing so to avail themselves of another state's law,
* Prohibit laws barring interstate communications about a matter that is legal to communicate about in either state,
* Prohibit revocation of immigration status based upon speech which would be protected by the First Amendment for a U.S. citizen,
* Prohibit involuntary denaturalization under any circumstances (even in the naturalization was secured by fraud which could be prosecuted but could not result in loss of U.S. citizenship), and
* Expressly include the limitation on the suspension of habeas corpus to places where the federal courts are not open established by Ex Parte Milligan and to clarify that the writ of habeas corpus is available to person detained outside the territory of the United States by the federal government or its agents or contractors.

Election Law Amendment

* Make Section 3 of the 14th Amendment (the insurrection clause) self-executing in any local, state, or federal tribunal with jurisdiction over qualifications to hold public offices or elections for those offices,
* Create eligible voter standing to enforce election laws including campaign finance laws, and constitutional provisions related to elections in jurisdictions where the voter has a right to vote,
* Remove the authority of Congress to resolve disputes over the election or qualifications of their members or the validity of duly certified state elections for federal offices, vesting that authority, instead, in the courts,
* Invalidate all statutory confidentiality rights other than attorney-client privilege and religious confession privilege for anyone running for, or holding, a federal elective office,
* Remove the authority of state legislatures to appoint electors for the President by any means other than a vote of the people,
* Require federal elections be administered at the state and local level by officials who are not partisan elected officials or appointees of partisan elected officials,
* Authorize non-criminal remedies for false statements of presently existing facts, or false statements related to voting, made with actual malice, in connection with political speech, and
* Constitutionally overrule Citizens United which constitutionally prohibits any rigorous campaign finance regulation.

Pardon Power Amendment

* Expressly prohibit the President from pardoning himself, or members of his family, or a President who appointed the current President to the office that put him in the line of succession to be President,
* Prohibit pardons from contempt of court sanctions whether civil or criminal, 
* Invalidate pardons for criminal conduct taken in reliance on a promise from the President that it would be pardoned, or issued in exchange for any consideration,
* Require notice of all pardons and commutation (other than a stay of execution) to be transmitted to Congress to be effective, and to subject them to a legislative veto in the same way as a veto override that must be acted upon with a certain period of time (perhaps 35 days) after it is transmitted to Congress.

Congressional Supremacy Amendment

* Clarify that Congress has plenary authority over the operations and organization of the Executive branch, and over how the President exercises his discretion in any matter whatsoever of which the constitution or statutes grants him authority, which the President has no authority to contradict,
* Require all Executive Orders purporting to impact anyone outside of the Executive branch of the federal government to be transmitted to Congress and paused until ratified by both houses of Congress, or until three weeks have elapsed, before taking effect, and to allow either house of Congress alone, by majority vote, to repeal any Executive Order,
* Legalize legislative veto legislation (retroactively),
* Confirm the authority of Congress to pass anti-impoundment legislation,
* Confirm the validity of civil service protections for public servants,
* Confirm the validity of government contracting rules established by Congress,
* Constitutionally disavow the "unitary executive" theory by expressly allowing Congress to create independent agencies whose directors, boards, and staff cannot be dismissed or directed by the President,
* Validate the constitutionality of laws such as the Administrative Procedures Act which governs how executive branch discretion may be exercised,
* Provide that Congress has the authority to waive any claim of executive privilege made by the President, and
* Constitutionally ratify the authority of Congress to pass legislation like the War Powers Act.

01 May 2025

Quick Observations On Taxes And The Social Welfare System

Some important provisions of the U.S. tax code that are substantively trying to do the right thing are just way too complex. Some examples:

* The taxation of tip income.
* The Earned Income Tax credit.
* The Obamacare tax credit for people who don't have employer provided health insurance, and the closely related taxation of health insurance for self-employed people
* Medicaid eligibility.
* Eligibility for other means tested programs like TANF, SNAP, and WIC.
* Public housing subsidies.
* The unemployment insurance system.
* The Social Security disability and SSI programs.
* The way that deductibles and co-pays and maximum coverage limits are handled with private health insurance.

Simple is better, for example:

* The standard deduction.
* The per child tax credit.
* Social Security retirement and survivors insurance programs.
* Medicare.
* HMO structures for most out-of-pocket health insurance expenses.
* India's right to show up to work and receive guaranteed paid employment.
* New Zealand's comprehensive no fault national insurance for all accidental injuries.

Accepting a certain amount of rough justice by making the bureaucracy of daily life for low income people simpler is well worth it, because this group of people is least capable of dealing effectively with paperwork and bureaucracy and complex rules. Reduced barriers to access and administrative costs can fund somewhat more generous benefits.

If you are going to have complex rules and bureaucratic systems they should be reserved for sophisticated, affluent individuals and entities.

24 April 2025

Fleeting Thoughts From The Brink

So far, the worst case scenario in Trump 2.0 is being held at bay by federal judges, state attorneys' general, attorneys for civic groups like the ACLU, attorneys for unions, the main stream media, a smattering of private lawyers, and the financial markets. Harvard University, the Atlantic magazine, anonymous leakers in the federal government, a handful of members of Congress, consumer boycotters, street protesters, social media social justice warriors, rebellious federal workers and former federal workers, foreign diplomats, foreign heads of state, and Tesla vandals are making good showings in supporting roles. 

Most of the relief that courts have granted so far is preliminary, and has come only after significant harm has been done from wrongful conduct by the Trump Administration. Conservative intermediate federal appellate courts and the ultraconservative U.S. Supreme Court have the potential to undo many of these temporary wins. 

Some of the damage that is being done can't be remedied. Our reputation as a reliable and predictable trade partner is irrevocably damaged. Some U.S. exporters have been permanently replaced with non-U.S. exporters. The credit rating of the U.S. and the strength of the dollar has been damaged in the long run. Our credibility as an ally on national security matters will suffer for decades. Our credibility as a provider of high quality higher education to international students will suffer for many years past this administration. Our desirability as a tourist destination is damaged in the long term. Our status on the democracy and corruption indexes will be downgraded for a long time. Many long running scientific and medical research projects have been derailed beyond repair. The extent to which businesses, foreign and domestic, and private citizens, can expert the predictable application of the rule of law and stability in the legal environment has been shattered for decades to come. U.S. soft power abroad has been destroyed and we no longer have a reputation as a guardian of human rights. The objectives of all of our foreign aid programs have been undermined permanently. Our political system is now a model for what to avoid and not one to be emulated. The reputations of Americans abroad has been undermined. We will not, for the foreseeable future, have a country where it is safe for everyone to travel and live in every U.S. state destroying sixty years or so when that was the case. A consensus that anti-racism and anti-sexism is good is gone. A consensus that Nazis and the KKK are bad is gone. A consensus that empathy is a good thing is gone. We have lost scientists and other great minds and consciences to expatriation, many for good. We are no longer a nation with any significant core of shared values on either matters of substance or the political process.

The U.S. is weaker in foreign policy and military affairs than at any time since before World War II, if not further back. This puts Taiwan and the Philippines at risk. This puts Ukraine at risk. This puts Poland and Lithuania and Latvia and Estonia at risk. Greenland (and by association Denmark and NATO) are in Trump's crosshairs undermining that alliance. Panama is now a target and all goodwill there has been lost. Our long standing relations with Canada and Mexico have been shattered. The risk of a stronger China-Russia alliance has been heightened. We don't have the united front necessary to have leverage over Iran.

Israel isn't really at risk, but we are doing nothing to improve the deteriorating situation in Gaza which genocide or not, could lead to a lot of deaths because Gaza doesn't have the means to support the people who are currently residing there and they have no way to leave.

The one foreign policy/military agenda item upon which the U.S. has held firm from Biden to Trump is that the Houthis and their Red Sea vicinity piracy are receiving a firm U.S. military response.

Trump is literally pulling out of Africa entirely, closing embassies, ending aid programs, and in general, just walking away. And, while this was never a focus of U.S. foreign policy, this turns the continent over to China and ISIS.

Tesla, and Elon Musk's reputation and business empire, have suffered immense, quite possibly irrevocable blows from the combination of his political actions at DOGE destroying their reputation at home and abroad, and from the gross defects in the design and manufacturing of the Cybertruck including systemic odometer fraud. Major clients of Starlink have cancelled their contract for political reasons too. And spectacular SpaceX failures haven't helped either. There may also be securities fraud and suspicious transactions like its Canadian tax credit fraud, its related party transaction with X and xAI, and questions about a huge amount of missing money on Tesla's balance sheet. Musk's distracted attention from his multiple businesses hasn't helped them either.

Lockheed is going to lose F-35 contracts. Boeing has lost sales to China. U.S. farmers who export their products are losing. U.S. oil and gas producers are losing. Private retirement accounts are losing. The U.S. dollar is dramatically weaker. U.S. manufacturing companies are laying people off and being crippled from Apple to Johnny Walker.

The interest rate on the national debt has gone up with costs taxpayers money without providing anything in return. Food safety has been interrupted. Weather reporting has been impaired. Disease control is crippled and multiple epidemics are surging due to the quack leading the Health and Human Services Department. The military academies have been irrevocably impaired.

The Republicans in Congress have caved to almost all of even the worst excesses of Trump 2.0. They even approved insane and grossly under-qualified RFK, Jr. to Health and Human Services, as well as a host of other grossly unqualified candidates to positions where their mission it to undermine everything their agencies are charged with doing rather than faithfully executing the law. They have not stopped tariffs which were probably not authorized by law in the first place and violated the WTO treaties and the NAFTA 2.0 treaty. There have been a few attempted rebellions by small numbers of Republicans who have considerable power if they want it because the GOP majority in both the House and Senate are thin, but basically every time, they have backed down.

The end game remains uncertain. Where Trump's wrong has been acting by executive order, Congress could ratify or adopt his policies properly and by law, although he hasn't done that, in part, because he doesn't think that he can get clean support from the entire Republican caucus for his extreme measures. SCOTUS could undermine the judges who have stepped in to stop him. There is still a constitutional crisis pending over Trump's disregard of court orders related to his illegal Alien Enemies Act deportations among others. Trump could get bolder and could continue to ignore court orders without consequences. For now, Trump won't invoke the Insurrection Act, but we could have martial law and cancelled elections before it is over and he's claiming he may unconstitutionally seek a third term.

If we make it to a reasonably free and fair midterm election in 2026, it is possible that Republicans will be dramatically swept out of power as the consequences of Trump's damaging and unpopular policies becomes apparent, and that could save us. But, the core MAGA base of 35-40% of voters is largely holding fast, even as independents start to slide towards the Democrats, and there is no guarantee that the 2026 elections will be free and fair. Worst case scenario for the GOP, it could go into the wilderness for 60 years like it did after Herbert Hoover's failed tariffs.

Some of the most frightening parts of Trump's early moves have been his ability to gain GOP support to appoint utterly incompetent people to destroy the federal government, Trump's anti-DEI campaign that is evolving into straight up state supported racism and sexism and discrimination applied not just to the federal government but also to state and local schools, private colleges and universities, and private businesses, as well as esteemed and irreplaceable federal cultural institutions. His acts of retaliation against law firms, individuals, and others (even countries). His seeming ability to circumvent the Administrative Procedure Act, civil service protections, union collective bargaining agreements, Congressionally enacted protections for independent agencies, inspector generals, NEPA, duly enacted Congressional appropriations, the Office of Legal Counsel, JAG Corps, and fair minded constitution protecting senior military officers. He's compromised the limited independence of immigration judges. Many more decent people are just washing their hands and resigning rather than being a part of Trump's illegal agenda. 

Trump could order invasions of Greenland or the Panama Canal without Congressional support and get away with it, possibly even triggering a war with NATO. 

SCOTUS has done us no favors in overruling *Roe* with *Dobbs*, with over ruling *Chevron* deference to federal regulations, with deciding that Trump has broad immunity from criminal prosecution, with deciding contrary to clear constitutional language and precedent that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment isn't self-executing, with mealy mouthed responses to Trump's defiance of the law even when it has taken action, with its pro-gun nut jurisprudence on the Second Amendment, and in this time of tyranny, perhaps more than anything, its "unitary executive" jurisprudence.

If democracy does survive, the long standing two party structure of Republicans and Democrats seems likely to fall apart. The minority of reasonable conservatives in the GOP are leaving the party in favor of being independents or flooding the Democratic party tent with principled conservatives and libertarians. The Democratic party tent is getting spread to thin to be cohesive but for its current common enemy. If Trump alienates enough big business and establishment Republicans, the GOP could find it has no money to back it up. Progressives are falling for nihilism, convinced that Democrats are against them and not just lacking the power to secure what they want. The Republican Party of 2025 is a populist, far-right, basically neo-Nazi party. Its major screw ups in Trump 2.0 and violent swing to the right could leave it as a permanent minority party with a mish mash of everyone else trying to form coalitions to keep it out of power (which our current single member district plurality system makes challenging).

Looking at the big picture: What is the solution? Is the problem that we need better institutions? Is the problem that we need a one time reset to purge or undermine bad SCOTUS judges? Does the political culture need to change? Do we just need better politicians to run for the good causes seeing that they are needed and for Trump to die? Is the U.S. constitution resilient enough to weather this crisis? Would it be better if the U.S. constitution failed forcing a new regime from scratch since the corrections that are necessary can't be made through the ordinary means? Do we need more street politics?

What if we make it through this crisis but badly damaged in a way that sets us on a path to inevitable long term decline and degradation even though we avoid the worst case scenarios this time around? We are already a flawed democracy. Maybe will fall further down that scale, become a mere semi-democracy and more corrupt than we have become, experiencing nationwide the kind of decline that the rust belt and coal belt have seen so far.

Should the U.S. split up? Do red states realize how dependent they are on money from blue states? I sense that if red states went it alone that they wouldn't replace much of what the federal government provided and would instead just treat its poor and sick and weak worse, and would become more hateful. The blue states would be weaker for smaller scale, but would allow their prosperity to overcome it and would adopt new and better policies unrestrained by red state backwardness.

How far will women's rights, gay rights, trans rights, non-Christian rights retreat? How far will our isolation from the globe grow? How many immigrants will be purged? How will our national character wither?

One of the deep institutional flaws of the U.S. government that doesn't get talked about enough is that we have an inferior system of public law (the law regulating government) and also have government institutions that aren't good at basic functions like making major military purchases, carrying out major public works programs, and managing large numbers of public servants. This is one major reason for the bias against having government rather than the private sector carry out tasks in U.S. politics compared to many other countries, even when government is really better suited to the tasks in question, and it is a major reason that the U.S. has started to increasing lag relative to its developed world counterparts.

When I first learned that many countries put the prosecutor's office in the judicial branch rather than the executive branch, I was skeptical, thinking that this would make judges biased in favor of prosecutors. And, in countries like South Korea and Japan, that does happen. But, seeing Trump try to use the criminal justice system to persecute his political opponents, I can see the potential benefits to insulating prosecutors from partisan elected officials outside the executive branch (something that almost largely removes the need to have an awkward and flawed special prosecutor system to address criminal acts within the executive branch).

10 April 2025

Neither The Space Force Nor The Air Force Should Exist

Military space resources are necessary. A separate Space Force bureaucracy is just a very expensive and wasteful PR stunt. The Space Force shouldn't exist, and honestly, we'd be better off if the Air Force were merged back into the Army again as well.

If the Air Force weren't separate from the Army, the Army wouldn't be trying to build helicopters to do jobs that fixed wing aircraft jobs would do better, and the Air Force fighter mafia wouldn't be neglecting CAS and logistics, and joint air-land cooperation would be handled in the same lower level command and control unit in the same way that this is done in the U.S. Marine Corps. 

The Space Force just adds insult to injury and makes coordination between troops on the ground and space resources, and supporting Air Force resources, even more poor. And, it also creates stupid unnecessary bureaucratic empires that cost money and don't add value.

20 February 2025

Trump's DOD Budget

Trump has ordered the DOD leadership to come up with 8% budget cuts, for each of the next five years (about $68 billion per year) from the DOD budget while preserving 17 priorities. Those priorities are:

  • Southwest Border Activities
  • Combating Transnational Criminal Organizations in the Western Hemisphere
  • Audit
  • Nuclear Modernization (including NC3)
  • Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCAs)
  • Virginia-class Submarines
  • Executable Surface Ships
  • Homeland Missile Defense
  • One-Way Attack/Autonomous Systems
  • Counter-small UAS Initiatives
  • Priority Critical Cybersecurity
  • Munitions
  • Core Readiness, including full DRT funding
  • Munitions and Energetics Organic Industrial Bases
  • Executable INDOPACOM MILCON
  • Combatant Command support agency funding for INDOPACOM, NORTHCOM, SPACECOM, STRATCOM, CYBERCOM, and TRANSCOM
  • Medical Private-Sector Care
It will be interesting to see what cuts will be proposed. To recap some cuts that I have suggested:
  • The Selective Service System.
  • Most tanks in the U.S. Army (transfer them to allies who want them like Ukraine and Taiwan).
  • New destroyers (of existing designs) for the U.S. Navy.
  • The U.S. military base at Guantanamo Bay.
  • Bomber aircraft in the Air National Guard.
  • Canon artillery in the Army National Guard.
  • The Space Force (which should be merged into the Air Force).
  • The Air Force (which should be merged into the Army).
  • Stealth fighters in the Air National Guard.
  • The Next-Generation Intratheater Airlift (NGIA) program in the Air Force (it duplicates a more advanced Army Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft program).
  • The amphibious assault mission of the U.S. Marine Corps.
  • The U.S. Navy's nuclear-armed sea-launched cruise missile (SLCM-N) program.
  • Most U.S. military VIP transport aircraft.
  • The Armored Multipurpose Vehicle (AMPV) procurement of 522 M1283 General Purpose Vehicles, 993 M1286 Mission Command Vehicles, and 386 M1287 Mortar Carrier Vehicles. This would leave the AMPV program with 790 M1284 Medical Evacuation Vehicles and 216 M1285 Medical Treatment Vehicles.
  • The M10 Booker Mobile Protected Firepower program.
  • Retire the B1-B bomber (or transfer it to the U.S. Navy as a patrol aircraft).
  • The U.S. Army Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps (JROTC), which is a high school pre-ROTC program.
Some other programs which could be cut include:
  • The Constellation class frigate program (which is three years behind schedule and over budget, and remains vulnerable to various anti-surface combatant threats).
  • The next generation destroyer R&D program.
  • The next generation main battle tank R&D program.
  • Phase out canon artillery in the Army in favor of canon artillery substitute missiles deployed from C-130 transportable, wheeled vehicles.
  • Delay the "Next Generation Air Dominance" warplane.
  • Phase out the remaining 13 Ticonderoga-class guided missile cruisers (a class which entered service in 1983) ahead of schedule (which is September 30, 2027).