Included in the President’s fiscal year (FY) 2024 budget request is a troubling proposal that, if enacted, would forever change how Congress considers its annual discretionary budget – the roughly 30 percent of federal spending directly controlled by Congress from year to year.
For the second straight year, the Biden administration has proposed creating a third category of discretionary spending, beyond the current defense/non-defense and security/non-security distinctions. The third category is for the “Veterans Affairs Medical Care Program,” which is currently part of the non-defense and non-security categories of spending. It’s a sizable portion of the discretionary budget – $119 billion (6.9 percent) in FY 2023 and $121 billion (6.6 percent) in FY 2024.
The administration frames their request as follows:
“The Budget reiterates that medical care for veterans should be considered separately from other appropriations categories in order to ensure that the needs of veterans are never traded off against other national priorities.”
This proposal could serve to put upward pressure on the non-defense portion of the discretionary budget at a time when excessive spending is of great concern to taxpayers.
As we wrote of the first iteration of this proposal last year:
“Congress has distinguished between ‘defense’ and ‘non-defense’ spending for decades, with VA medical care long falling in the latter category. Creating a third category exclusively for the VA Medical Care Program would make it appear to some as if Congress is reducing non-defense discretionary spending. This budget sleight of hand could make it easier for Congress to green-light future increases to non-defense discretionary spending – or, as the Biden OMB might euphemistically put it, avoid ‘shortchanging other critical programs.’”
We also worry that this would distort the “parity” debate that occurs over discretionary spending most years on Capitol Hill. In the ideal, parity would serve as a downward pressure on both defense and non-defense discretionary spending – Republicans would accept sacrifices on their favored portion of the discretionary budget (defense) in exchange for sacrifices from Democrats on their favored portion (non-defense). In reality, parity often leads to the exact opposite: defense increases in exchange for non-defense increases.
As NTU wrote last year:
“Now, parity can mean the same percentage increase in defense and non-defense spending from one year to the next, or it can mean the same dollar figure for defense and non-defense spending in a given fiscal year. If lawmakers measure parity in the latter way, then moving VA Medical Care Program spending to its own category will increase the amount of non-defense discretionary spending Democrats may demand to achieve “parity” with defense spending in the years ahead.”
This proposal was concerning last year and it is concerning this year, and Congress should reject it. Discretionary spending needs to decrease in both the defense and non-defense categories or, absent meaningful cuts, Congress should at least stem the growth in discretionary spending programs.