
Will County Board refuses to drop 143rd Street widening from transporation plan, but stalls passage
Will County's five-year transportation improvement plan, typically approved each June, will head back to committee for more review after a motion to remove the controversial 143rd Street road project from the plan failed.
The County Board's Public Works and Transportation Committee will discuss the transportation plan July 1.
Every year, the Will County Division of Transportation puts out the newest version of the plan, which outlines future road projects. With engineering, planning, right of way acquisition, utility relocation and construction, road improvement projects span multiple years.
The county's highway system includes 258 miles of roads and 87 bridges, and it expects to spend about $756.2 million in the next five years on corridor, bridge and intersection improvements and general maintenance.
The 143rd Street project in Homer Glen, which is a $72.6 million improvement, has been fiercely debated for more than 18 months, and some members of the County Board asked Wednesday to have it removed from the plan, citing resident opposition.
Recently, a bill authorizing the county to use quick-take powers to seize property along 143rd Street stalled in Springfield. Although the bill was not voted on by the time the legislature ended their spring session May 31, that does not stop the widening project.
Will County began engineering studies in 2009 to widen 143rd Street from two to five lanes from State Street/Lemont Road to Bell Road. For more than a decade, county officials voiced their support for the project, and $6.2 million has already been spent. A $7 million federal grant earmarked for the project must be obligated by 2026.
County Board member Steve Balich, a Republican who represents Homer Glen, said the delay in Springfield means county officials need to work with Homer Glen officials on creating a new solution for the road that pleases residents.
Board member Judy Ogalla, a Monee Republican, said Homer Glen's population has not boomed like it was anticipated years ago, and the road did not become a commercial corridor as once planned.
Expanding the road from two to five lanes would 'completely change the quality of life,' for Homer Glen residents, Ogalla said.
Traffic counts, however, show that the road should be expanded to improve flow and safety, county officials said.
'Those studies show that the traffic count on 143rd is 3,000 vehicles per day more than what warrants a four- and five-lane system,' said County Board Speaker Joe VanDuyne, the past chairman of the Public Works and Transportation Committee.
Even though the population of Homer Glen has remained the same, the roadway use has been increasing, said Jeff Ronaldson, the county's transportation director.
More drivers have been using 143rd Street even after the Illinois Department of Transportation widened 159th Street just two miles away, Ronaldson said.
Removing 143rd Street from the transportation plan could jeopardize the federal funding the county has received for this project.
VanDuyne, a Wilmington Democrat, said the county risks losing future grants because it shows it is not committed to the projects it has approved.
Ronaldson said if the county widened 143rd Street to three lanes, a similar amount of land would have to be taken. The project as planned doesn't affect Reed Elementary School and its bus queuing area, he said.
After the vote to remove 143rd Street from the five-year transportation plan failed, the board opted to send the plan back to committee for more discussion.
'The portion of the plan that details information about 143rd Street will likely be discussed but it is unclear what, if any, changes will come from it,' said Mark Revis, the vice chair of the Public Works and Transportation Committee, who will preside over the July 1 meeting.
Revis, of Plainfield, has been the only Republican who supports the 143rd Street widening. He was also the only Republican not to sign onto a lawsuit against county Executive Jennifer Bertino-Tarrant, when she vetoed an attempt last year to alter the 143rd Street plan. That lawsuit was recently dismissed in Will County Circuit Court.
Revis said he would like to see a footnote added to the five-year plan that says it is subject to change and based on estimates.
Board member Dan Butler, a Frankfort Republican, said the 143rd Street project is just one part of the transportation improvement plan that needs a closer look.
He said he would like to see more details overall in the plan that includes such items as the county's priorities, why projects were planned the way they were and if there are other options for the projects, such as creating turning lanes or adding traffic lights.
Butler, who proposed sending the plan back to committee, said he is against quick take or eminent domain to seize land and wants to ensure local and township officials are consulted about all road projects before money is spent. He also wants more details on how much pipeline relocations will cost.
'I want to take care of the roads and serve the people in a way that everybody benefits and not make people miserable where they live,' Butler said. 'I don't want to be wasteful and spend money on things that will hurt townships or communities.'
VanDuyne said it was unfortunate the plan was referred back to committee, saying the transportation department each year provides a detailed look at their projects, and County Board members have plenty of time to offer their suggestions.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Politico
34 minutes ago
- Politico
Rand Paul forces GOP into megabill runaround
Presented by IN TODAY'S EDITION:— The GOP's remarkable shunting of Rand Paul— What could get cut in next week's Byrd bath— First in IC: GOP wary of Vought's new funding trick Sen. Rand Paul is a frequent thorn in GOP leadership's side. But his recent break over border security funding in President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' has top Republicans pushing the bounds of institutional norms to rein him in, our Hailey Fuchs reports. Senior Republicans have sidelined Paul, who chairs the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, in their talks with the White House over policies under the panel's purview. Budget Chair Lindsey Graham told Hailey he has taken over as the lead negotiator around how to shepherd through tens of billions of dollars for border wall construction and related infrastructure in the GOP megabill. Meanwhile, a Senate Republican aide said Sen. James Lankford — who heads the relevant Homeland Security subcommittee — will be the point person for negotiating the bill's government affairs provisions. With every other committee chair helping manage negotiations for their panels' portions of the massive tax and spending package, cutting Paul out is unprecedented. But Paul proposed funding border security at a fraction of what the administration requested and the House passed in its bill. 'Senator Paul usually votes 'no' and blames everybody else for not being pure enough,' Graham told Hailey. 'As chairman, you … don't have that luxury sometimes. You have to do things as chairman you wouldn't have to do as a rank-and-file member.' Indeed, few of Paul's own committee members appear willing to defend him. Paul lost an ally in Sen. Ron Johnson, a fellow deficit hawk, after top White House adviser Stephen Miller briefed senators on the administration's border request and made a persuasive argument. Graham said the meeting was requested by himself and Majority Leader John Thune to 'contest' Paul's offer. Paul did not attend. Sen. Josh Hawley said Paul's decision to draft his own proposal 'without any consultation of the committee' was concerning, adding that he had 'never seen that happen before.' Nonetheless, Paul still believes some pieces of his own plan unrelated to border security will end up in the final bill, he told our Jordain Carney Wednesday, and that he's involved in ongoing talks with the Senate parliamentarian. Speaking of the parliamentarian: Senate rule-keeper Elizabeth MacDonough is scrubbing the final draft of the megabill in a 'big, beautiful' Byrd bath. Her rulings on which provisions will fly under the filibuster-skirting budget reconciliation process are expected to roll in through the middle of next week, when Thune wants to schedule the first procedural vote related to the package, Jordain reports. Republicans are bracing for an answer to one consequential question they punted on earlier this year: whether they can use an accounting maneuver known as 'current policy baseline' to make it appear that extending Trump's 2017 tax cuts would cost nothing. Senate Finance Republicans and Democrats will make a joint presentation to MacDonough this weekend about which provisions to keep or scrap. And there's no shortage of GOP priorities under Byrd scrutiny — from tax cuts on certain gun silencers to a plan to raise taxes on foreign companies known as the 'revenge tax.' Other outstanding issues before the parliamentarian: whether Commerce has to tweak language to prohibit states from regulating AI over the next decade; whether Judiciary can block judges' ability to issue preliminary injunctions and whether Agriculture can use the megabill to pay for pieces of the stalled farm bill. TGIF. Have you joined the dating app being advertised outside of Cups? Email us, we have questions: crazor@ mmccarthy@ and lkashinsky@ Follow our live coverage at THE SKED The House is out but will have a pro forma session at 11 a.m. The Senate is out but will have a pro forma session at 3:15 p.m. Next week: Both chambers will be back in session on Monday. The Senate will continue taking up Trump's nominations, including Daniel Zimmerman to be an assistant secretary of Defense, and work toward a vote on the GOP megabill. THE LEADERSHIP SUITE Thune's megabill timeline troubles The Senate majority leader is ramping up efforts to quell rebellions within his conference over the megabill as he works to get it to the floor next week. That includes talking to Trump, who he frequently refers to as his 'closer,' on a near-daily basis, Thune told Jordain. Thune's got his work cut out for him. Hawley is urging GOP leaders to strike Senate Finance's language that would largely reduce the provider tax to 3.5 percent from 6 percent, warning that it won't fly with House Republicans who voted to freeze, rather than reduce, the tax that many states use to fund their Medicaid programs. Hawley told Jordain in an exclusive interview that House Republicans have told him they were 'not consulted' and it 'cannot pass.' (Read more from that conversation on our Inside Congress Live blog later this morning.) 'I don't know why we would pass something that the House can't pass and will force us into [a] conference,' Hawley said. House Republicans — including members of Speaker Mike Johnson's circle — were indeed blindsided by the Senate's move, Mia reports with our Meredith Lee Hill. Moderates in the chamber are now scrambling to undo it, working with hospitals and planning to set up calls with leadership. Hawley told Jordain he's prepared to support the House's provider-tax freeze — with minor technical clarifications that 13 states' hospital associations, including his own, asked for in a letter Inside Congress scooped Monday. GOP leaders are also pondering a fund to support rural hospitals, but Hawley says that isn't enough. White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt declined in a press conference Thursday to share Trump's preference for how to break the stalemate, 'out of respect for the ongoing discussions that the White House is very much actively involved in.' Thune also has other policy disputes to resolve, including over the state-and-local-tax deduction cap critical to a cadre of moderate House Republicans. That's leaving some of his members openly doubting whether Thune can meet his party's self-imposed July Fourth deadline to send the bill to the president's desk. Sen. Tommy Tuberville put it at a '50/50 chance,' saying there could be half a dozen Senate Republicans still wavering; Thune can only afford to lose three. ICYMI: Megabill debt warnings fall on deaf ears inside the GOP FIRST IN INSIDE CONGRESS: Schumer, Dems hammer Thune on safety-net changes Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Sens. Amy Klobuchar, Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley — the ranking members on Agriculture, Finance and Budget, respectively — are spearheading a letter from the Senate Democratic Caucus urging Thune to work across the aisle on health care and food assistance rather than forging ahead with changes in Republicans' party-line push. That won't happen. But the letter, which Jordain obtained exclusively, is a preview for Democrats' lines of attack against two of the most controversial pieces of the GOP megabill: Changes to Medicaid and shifting part of the cost of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program to states. 'If enacted, these cuts to food assistance and health care will mean widespread hardship for Americans,' Democrats wrote in the letter. 'Just because the House has acted in this regard does not mean the U.S. Senate must make the same mistakes.' Schumer and Senate Democrats will convene a Zoom call Saturday to discuss their strategy ahead of anticipated floor action next week, a person with direct knowledge told Jordain. Schumer says senators set for Iran briefing Schumer has privately confirmed there will be an all-senators classified briefing on Iran early next week, a Schumer aide told Jordain. It comes as Trump says he'll decide within in two weeks whether to strike the country amid its escalating confrontation with Israel. Trump said in a statement Thursday he set that deadline based on a 'substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place in the near future.' Top Senate Democrats are demanding more information, pushing Trump to outline a strategy on Iran before any American involvement, our Connor O'Brien reports. Sen. Tim Kaine's resolution requiring congressional approval for Trump to take military action in Iran will be eligible for a vote next Friday — within the president's two-week window — though it's not gaining much Republican support. Garcia leads Dems' Oversight race Rep. Robert Garcia is emerging as the prohibitive favorite to win Democrats' vacant top slot on House Oversight ahead of next Tuesday's vote, Nicholas Wu and Hailey report. The 47-year-old Californian has run a careful campaign, focusing on his contributions on the panel and his experience as a big-city mayor, while sidestepping the age and seniority questions that are roiling his party. 'The seniority system in Congress is not going to go away,' Garcia said as he downplayed the notion that the race is a proxy battle in a larger war over the future leadership of the Democratic Party. 'There's an opportunity here to expand who's at that table, and I bring a different kind of experience.' Top House Dems condemn incident targeting GOP rep House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Whip Katherine Clark and Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar are condemning an incident in which GOP Rep. Max Miller said Thursday he was 'run off the road' by an aggressor with a Palestinian flag. They're also using the latest alleged attack on a lawmaker to bolster Jeffries' push for more resources for member security. POLICY RUNDOWN MEGABILL'S MEGA IMPACTS — As the House and Senate debate how much to slash clean-energy tax credits in the GOP's party-line bill, hundreds of investments — mostly in Republican districts — are at imminent risk of being stifled, our Kelsey Tamborrino and Jessie Blaeser report. There are 794 wind farms, solar plants, battery storage facilities and other clean electricity generation projects that have not yet started construction and could lose key tax breaks if the final bill rolls back key provisions in the Democrats' 2022 climate law. Even under the Senate's less aggressive proposal, the projects lose all of their tax breaks if they don't break ground in time. And Republicans could be at the brunt of it: Three out of four clean electricity generation projects that could benefit from the tax credits would be built in GOP districts, according to the POLITICO analysis. FIRST IN INSIDE CONGRESS: WH FLOATS NEW FUNDING TRICK — OMB Director Russ Vought's strained relationship with GOP appropriators is about to be tested once more as the White House pursues 'pocket rescissions' — the ultimate end-run around congressional funding power, our Jennifer Scholtes reports this morning. Vought has repeatedly pushed the idea of 'pocket rescissions' as a way to codify the spending cuts Elon Musk made through his Department of Government Efficiency initiative. It's a dizzying maneuver that would involve sending a list of spending cuts to Capitol Hill with less than 45 days left until the end of the fiscal year, and then withholding — or 'pocketing' — the money if lawmakers don't act on the request. But the federal government's top watchdog says it's against the law, as do some of the appropriators already frustrated with the administration's moves to run roughshod over Congress' 'power of the purse' ahead of an upcoming government-funding deadline. 'Pocket rescissions are illegal, in my judgment,' Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins said in an interview this week. GOP TIFFS OVER TIKTOK — Trump's latest move to keep TikTok alive is frustrating congressional Republicans who object to China's continued involvement in the popular app and want a divestment deal finished, our Anthony Adragna reports. Trump on Thursday signed another 90-day delay of a law that would require TikTok to divest from ByteDance, the app's Beijing-based company, after repeated extensions since January. Lawmakers passed this law with bipartisan support in the previous Congress, and it was upheld last year by the Supreme Court. 'The law is clear - TikTok can only be used in the U.S. if ByteDance divests its foreign ownership, with only one permissible extension of the compliance deadline,' Rep. Dan Newhouse said Thursday in a post on X. He added he believes the law should be 'implemented as written.' CRYPTO CHALLENGES AHEAD — Trump is urging House Republicans to send a 'clean' version of the Senate-passed stablecoin regulatory framework to his desk 'LIGHTNING FAST' — dialing up the pressure on congressional Republicans as they mull changes to the bill, including potentially packaging it with broader digital-assets market structure legislation. Trump doesn't seem too keen on that approach as he looks to score a big crypto win, fast: 'NO DELAYS, NO ADD ONS,' he posted on Truth Social. Senate Banking is set to hold a hearing next week on its version of that separate, market-structure legislation. Best of POLITICO Pro and E&E: THE BEST OF THE REST ICE Imposes New Rules on Congressional Visits, from Michael Gold at the New York Times This Former Congressman Survived Political Violence. He Carried a Gun 'To Fire Back.', from Ben Jacobs for POLITICO Magazine Amid change, Roll Call endures, from Nathan L. Gonzales for Roll Call (Opinion) JOB BOARD Jacob Downs is now press secretary for Rep. David Kustoff. He most recently was press assistant for Rep. Nancy Mace. Athena Hood has been promoted to deputy press secretary for the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee. She most recently was a press assistant for the committee. Hannah Hussey has been promoted to director of operations for Rep. David Kustoff. Blake Nolan has been promoted to chief of staff for Rep. Vern Buchanan. Heather Smith has been promoted to chief of staff for Rep. William Timmons. Ben Nichols is now comms adviser at the FDA's office of external affairs. He was previously deputy comms director for House Ag Committee Republicans. HAPPY BIRTHDAY Sen. Eric Schmitt (5-0) … Reps. Don Beyer, Deborah Ross and Ralph Norman … Adrienne Elrod … former Rep. Phil English… POLITICO's Josh Gerstein and Mackenzie Wilkes… Ian Prior … Brandon Arnold of the National Taxpayers Union … Tom Zigo of the MPA … Brad Howard of Corcoran Street Group … Ryan Walker of Heritage Action … Ginger Loper … Gisselle Reynolds of Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart's office … Emma Tenery … Chris Grieco TRIVIA WEDNESDAY'S ANSWER: Brian Caudill correctly answered that John Scott Harrison was the lawmaker who was the only person to be the son and father of a U.S. president (son of William Henry Harrison and father of Benjamin Harrison). TODAY'S QUESTION, from Mia: Happy belated Juneteenth! In what year was the first congressional resolution recognizing Juneteenth Independence Day introduced? The first person to correctly guess gets a mention in the next edition of Inside Congress. Send your answers to insidecongress@


Politico
39 minutes ago
- Politico
How Rand Paul got sidelined by fellow Republicans
As chair of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, Sen. Rand Paul technically has jurisdiction over a central plank of President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful bill.' But the Kentucky Republican's desire to aggressively cut the administration's request for border security spending has sidelined him in negotiations. In an interview this week, Senate Budget Chair Lindsey Graham said that he has taken over as the lead negotiator in talks with bicameral leadership and the White House over how to deploy tens of billions of dollars to strengthen border security and reduce the flow of migrant encounters at the southern border into the United States. Graham, a South Carolina Republican who released his own border security funding plan shortly after Paul introduced his, said he offered himself up to the Trump administration as the point person on the border security provisions of the megabill. 'Senator Paul usually votes 'no' and blames everybody else for not being pure enough,' said Graham, who has a long history of clashing with Paul over federal spending and foreign policy. 'As chairman, you … don't have that luxury sometimes. You have to do things as chairman you wouldn't have to do as a rank-and-file member.' 'Senator Paul's reducing the amount [for border security] didn't withstand scrutiny,' Graham added. 'The analysis was shallow.' At the same time, the office of Senate GOP Conference Vice-Chair James Lankford of Oklahoma — also the chair of the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Border Management, Federal Workforce and Regulatory Affairs — is planning to work directly with Senate leadership staff on the government affairs provisions, said a Senate Republican aide granted anonymity to describe internal party dynamics. Paul has made clear repeatedly he isn't planning to vote for the party-line tax and spending bill anyway, giving leadership few reasons to try and play nice. Yet the decision by senior Senate Republicans to undermine a committee chair in such a way marks a dramatic departure from standard Senate procedure. It also reflects the extent to which Paul has become an ideological island, despite him holding a committee gavel thanks to the chamber's rules around seniority. And in another break with precedent, few of Paul's own members on the Homeland Security panel, if any, appeared supportive of the chair's approach or willing to back him up against leadership's attempts to undermine him. Sen. Josh Hawley, a Missouri Republican, said it was concerning that Paul would draft his own proposal 'without any consultation of the committee.' Hawley added he had 'never seen that happen before.' Sen. Bernie Moreno (R-Ohio), who sits on both the Homeland and Budget panels who described Paul as 'well-meaning' and 'principled,' said if Paul's goal was to change people's minds, the Kentuckian would have been better off working with fellow members of his conference. 'If your objective is just to have a point of view, that's one thing you can do; but if your objective is to rally support, then you have a different path,' Moreno said. Paul has even lost an ally in Sen. Ron Johnson, another steadfast fiscal hawk who leadership hopes will ultimately support the megabill. Johnson said last week he will support the administration's border security funding request after hearing directly from Stephen Miller, a top White House adviser and architect of the president's immigration platform. Graham said he and Senate Majority Leader John Thune requested that Miller brief Senate Republicans on the administration's border security needs to 'contest the analysis of Senator Paul.' Paul did not attend the briefing, nor has he spoken to Graham about their differences, according to Graham. In a statement, Abigail Jackson, a spokesperson for the White House, had no direct comment on Paul's exclusion from the process. 'The administration is profoundly grateful for Senator Graham and the Budget Committee's excellent work on the Homeland Security Text,' said Jackson, adding that it would aid Trump's actions to crack down on illegal border crossings by 'funding at least one million removals, adding new ICE and border personnel, expanding detention capacity, and giving bonuses to hardworking Border Patrol and ICE agents.' The framework put forward by Graham, which Senate GOP leadership is expected to draw from in the final package they hope to vote on next week, would mirror the House-passed funding levels by allocating about $46.5 billion for the border wall and surrounding infrastructure and $5 billion for Customs and Border Protection facilities and checkpoints. In contrast, Paul's proposal would allocate just $6.5 billion in border wall and related infrastructure funding, with only $2.5 billion for CBP facilities and checkpoints. When asked about concerns he was operating without consulting his fellow Republicans on the panel, Paul emphasized that no committee is holding a markup on their contributions for the megabill. 'There were no committee votes on what the product would be,' Paul said. 'All of the drafts were done by the chairman of each committee.' Paul also said he thought some of the provisions of his proposal unrelated to border security would end up in the final bill, and that he was involved in talks with the parliamentarian about what provisions would be germane under the strict rules governing the filibuster-skirting budget reconciliation process Republicans want to use to pass the megabill. A Paul spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment about whether he still expected to have a say in negotiations with the parliamentarian. Jordain Carney contributed to this report.


Politico
39 minutes ago
- Politico
White House floats a new funding trick — and GOP lawmakers grimace
Russ Vought's relationship with Republican appropriators was already strained. Then he started talking about pursuing the ultimate end-run around their funding power heading into the fall. The White House budget director has been persistently touting the virtues of 'pocket rescissions,' a tactic he has floated as a way to codify the spending cuts Elon Musk made while atop his Department of Government Efficiency initiative, and which the federal government's top watchdog says is illegal. On Capitol Hill, leading GOP appropriators see Vought's comments as another shot against them in an escalating battle with the Trump administration over Congress' 'power of the purse.' And they warn that the budget director's adversarial posture hinders their relationship with the White House as they work to head off a government shutdown in just over three months. 'Pocket rescissions are illegal, in my judgment,' Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Susan Collins (R-Maine) said in a brief interview this week, 'and contradict the will of Congress and the constitutional authority of Congress to appropriate funds.' To hear Vought tell it, a 'pocket rescission' is a legitimate tool at the executive branch's disposal. In such a scenario, President Donald Trump would issue a formal request to claw back funding, similar to the $9.4 billion package he sent lawmakers this month to cancel congressionally approved funding for public broadcasting and foreign aid. But in this case, the memo would land on Capitol Hill less than 45 days before the new fiscal year is set to begin Oct. 1. By withholding the cash for that full timeframe — regardless of action by Congress — the White House would treat the funding as expired when the current fiscal year ends on Sept. 30. The dizzying ploy is another means toward the same goal Trump has been chasing since Inauguration Day: to spend less money than Congress has explicitly mandated in law. But the Government Accountability Office says the maneuver is unlawful, and the GOP lawmakers in charge of divvying up federal funding are wary that Vought is now talking about it in the open. 'I understand we want to use all the arrows in our quiver, and he wants to use all his,' Rep. David Joyce (R-Ohio), a senior member of the House Appropriations Committee, said of Vought in an interview. 'But every time you pull out an arrow, you have to be ready for the consequences, right?' Joyce continued: 'It's going to change the course of conversations and how each side works toward coming to resolution going forward.' Vought declined last week to elaborate on his intentions, when pressed in person on Capitol Hill about his plans to use the ploy in the coming months. His office also did not return a request for comment. However, the budget director laid out a detailed argument for the maneuver on television earlier in the month — then mentioned it again as he left a meeting with Speaker Mike Johnson and then during a later hearing with House appropriators. 'The very Impoundment Control Act itself allows for a procedure called pocket rescissions, later in the year, to be able to bank some of these savings, without the bill actually being passed,' Vought said on CNN. 'It's a provision that has been rarely used. But it is there. And we intend to use all of these tools.' Rep. Mike Simpson of Idaho, who chairs the appropriations panel that funds the Interior Department and the EPA, recently warned that the gambit is 'a bad idea' that 'undermines Congress' authority,' after saying last month that he thinks 'it's illegal' for a president to withhold funding lawmakers approved. But many top Republican appropriators — while scoffing at Vought's comments — aren't willing to engage in rhetorical arguments about the bounds of the president's spending power. 'Talking is one thing. We'll see if he actually does it,' Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Calif.), who chairs the appropriations panel that funds the military, said about Vought's comments. 'He's got his ideas,' said Rep. Steve Womack (R-Ark.), chair of the appropriations panel responsible for funding the departments of Transportation and Housing. 'I'd have some concerns about it,' said Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.), who chairs the appropriations panel that funds the departments of Education, Labor, and Health and Human Services — all targets of Trump's deepest funding cuts. Tension has been building for months between those Republican appropriators and Vought, who has a history of testing the limits of funding law: When he served in this same role during Trump's first administration, he froze aid to Ukraine in a move that helped set the stage for the president's first impeachment trial. Republican funding leaders are irked that the White House has yet to deliver a full budget request, which appropriators rely upon to write their dozen funding measures. Vought has already left open the door to withholding the new money if the administration doesn't agree with the spending priorities in the final bills. They also say the president's budget director and other Cabinet secretaries have withheld essential information about how they are using federal cash as the Trump administration fights off more than 100 legal challenges around the country. The suits are seeking to overturn the White House's freezing of billions of dollars Congress already approved for myriad programs and agencies. House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) issued a rare rebuke of Vought this spring for taking down the public website showing how agencies are expected to disburse federal dollars. But the Oklahoma Republican generally avoids any public criticism of the Trump administration and is not sounding off now about Vought's embrace of pocket rescissions. Cole said this month that he would 'look at each individual' request the White House sends to claw back funding, now that the House has passed the $9.4 billion package to nix money for foreign aid and public broadcasting. That package of funding cuts now sits in the Senate, where some top Republicans are interested in tweaking the plan to protect funding for preventing AIDS around the world and supporting PBS programming in their home states. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) suggested Vought's public comments about using pocket rescissions could be intended to encourage reluctant senators to clear it. 'Maybe that's the way to let members know: Vote for the ones he sends up,' Johnson said, noting that he would be 'totally supportive' of Vought using the tactic this fall. Another Senate fiscal hawk, Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Chair Rand Paul (R-Ky.), said he believes the law 'does allow for pocket rescissions.' 'I think the president should have more power not to spend money,' Paul told reporters last week. 'So if we have a way to reduce spending, by all means, we should use it.' No court has ruled on the president's power to cancel funding by sending Congress a request and then running out the clock at the end of the fiscal year. But GAO has twice weighed in. In 2018, the watchdog found that the law 'does not permit the withholding of funds through their date of expiration.' Vought, though, likes to cite an older GAO conclusion from 1975: It determined that Congress was unable to reject then-President Gerald Ford's requests to claw back funding 'in time to prevent the budget authority from lapsing.' Katherine Tully-McManus contributed to this report.