Latest news with #rescission
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Trump team's ‘pocket rescission' idea runs into GOP opposition
Some Republicans in Congress are uneasy about the possibility the Trump administration will use a 'pocket rescission' to claw back already approved government funding as fears of a fall shutdown rise. The Trump administration has already clawed back funds through the use of a rescissions package that passed both chambers of Congress, and some GOP lawmakers are concerned about having to vote on a second, possibly politically tougher, package of cuts. But these lawmakers say the use of pocket rescissions, an idea floated by the White House's budget chief that could yank back money without input from lawmakers, could create bad feelings not only with Democrats, but also with Republicans. 'Pocket rescissions, I think, are unconstitutional,' said Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho), a spending cardinal, this week. 'So, just like impoundment, I think, is unconstitutional.' 'So we'll see how it goes,' he said. Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought referred to pocket rescissions as 'one of the executive tools' that are 'on the table' earlier this month, as the administration continues a sweeping operation aimed at reducing federal spending. 'The president was elected to get us to balance, to deal with our fiscal situation, and we're going to use all of the tools that are there depending on the situation, and as we move through the year,' he said at an event. However, he also noted then that the administration hasn't yet 'made a determination to use it in part because we're making progress during the normal course of business with Congress.' Trump became the first president in decades to successfully claw back funds through the special rescissions process, with the GOP-led Congress agreeing to pull back about $9 billion in previously allocated funding for foreign aid and public broadcasting. The Impoundment Control Act (ICA) lays out rules governing that process and allows the administration to temporarily withhold funding for 45 days while Congress considers the request. If Congress opts not to approve the request in the timeframe, the funds must be released. Under a pocket rescission, however, experts say the president would send the same type of request to Congress, but do so within 45 days of the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30. The targeted funds could then essentially be held until the clock runs out and they expire. Vought has described the tactic as 'no different than a normal rescission, except for the timing of when it occurs.' 'A pocket rescission occurs later in the end of the fiscal year, within 45 days of the time that you have to hold the funding, and then the money evaporates at the end of the fiscal year,' he said. But some budget experts have strongly pushed back on the budget chief's characterization, arguing the tactic is 'illegal' and undermines the intent of the ICA. The Government Accountability Office also said during Trump's first presidential term that the law does not allow 'the withholding of funds through their date of expiration.' 'It is a method through which [Vought] would get to impound funds against congressional intent,' said Bobby Kogan, a former Senate budget aide and senior director of federal budget policy at the left-leaning Center for American Progress, in a recent interview. 'Pocket rescission says, 'Well, what if I send up a request 45 days before the end of the fiscal year, then even if Congress says no, I can still end all funding for the rest of the year, right?'' he argued. 'Like that's the concept behind a pocket rescission. Profoundly illegal because it would allow you to impound funds without congressional approval, which is illegal.' At the same time, other experts have argued impoundment law is murky on the matter and have described the tactic as a potential loophole. Some have defended the administration's interpretation of the law and argue lawmakers would have prohibited the maneuver over the years if they wanted to. Not all Republicans are certain about the legality of the use of pocket rescissions, however. 'I don't know. I haven't researched it,' Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), a senior appropriator and former attorney, said this week when asked by reporters whether pocket rescissions were legal. 'I'd prefer that we not do it that way.' The Louisiana Republican, who has been pushing for the White House to work with Congress to get more rescissions packages out the door, instead said it 'wouldn't bother' him if the administration sent 'a rescission package a week and spell out in detail what they want to propose we cut.' There's been concern from members on both sides of the aisle that the administration's plans to continue to claw back federal funding with only GOP support could threaten bipartisan funding talks for fiscal 2026. But Republican rifts over the president's latest rescissions requests were also an issue. The party clashed over potential cuts to programs like the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief and public broadcasting dollars that help fund not only PBS and NPR, but also local stations some Republicans say their constituents depend on. Under the pocket rescissions strategy, experts say the administration could reduce some funding by strategically holding up appropriations set to expire at the end of the fiscal year. If Congress chooses not to approve the administration's request for cuts, it could still provide funding for the program as part of a deal to keep the government open past September. Congress often opts to keep government funding levels mostly the same at the start of a new fiscal year to buy time for a larger deal updating funding levels. But experts have emphasized that would be 'new funding,' noting funding an account was denied at the end of the fiscal year as part of a pocket rescission likely would not roll over into the next. Asked whether another rescissions plan could worsen the outlook for a funding deal for fiscal 2026, House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) said this week that 'the only thing that would worry me is if Congress didn't get a chance to vote on it, that's the key thing.' 'I don't want to see things up here that get jammed where Congress doesn't vote.' Cole was asked whether he was referring to pocket rescissions. 'I don't care procedurally what you want to call it,' he responded. 'I expect Congress to vote on these things, and you know that would worry me, and I know that would worry my colleagues in the other chamber, on both sides of the aisle, certainly worry my Democratic colleagues here.' 'And there's a lot of Republican concern about this too,' he added. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Wall Street Journal
23-07-2025
- Business
- Wall Street Journal
Rescission Should Only Be the Start
As you note in your editorial 'Rescission Time for the GOP Senate' (July 16), Republicans shouldn't yet 'hang up a Mission Accomplished banner.' The package's $9 billion rescissions amount to 0.1% of the annual federal budget. Even after this package, fiscal 2025 spending will be 58% higher than pre-pandemic levels. But taking back appropriated money is very difficult politically. Rather than criticism, the rescission package calls for optimism about future reform. The GOP should build on this by passing a second rescission package and keeping spending from ballooning in appropriations. Alongside the rescission and reconciliation cuts, this would represent real progress.
Wall Street Journal
20-07-2025
- Politics
- Wall Street Journal
The Senate Rescinded Vital Unicef Funding
Your editorial, 'Rescission Time for the GOP Senate' (July 16), cheers the passage of a rescissions package that claws back $9.4 billion. While it's critical to cut waste, some of the spending slashed in this package is vital. This includes $142 million for Unicef. Though one senator referred to that money as program 'overhead,' it's actually core spending for Unicef. Those funds enable us to respond to humanitarian disasters, halt deadly diseases, fight malnutrition, provide clean water and sanitation services, and improve stability in highly volatile regions.
Daily Mail
17-07-2025
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Trump claims $9.4 billion in DOGE-inspired spending cuts
Donald Trump scored another big victory in Congress, this time getting through $9.4 billion in spending cuts on the heels of his 'big, beautiful bill' success. The Republican got his way despite three rebel Republicans - Lisa Murkowski, Alaska, Susan Collins (pictured), Maine, and Mitch McConnell, Kentucky - voting against it. It is the first of what GOP leaders expect to be many so-called 'rescission' packages where the White House asks lawmakers to rethink their approval of certain programs. The bill specifically contains 21 budget rescissions, many first identified by DOGE. The $9.4 billion in funds being clawed back includes about $1.1 billion in financing for public broadcasters, like PBS and NPR. It also contains roughly $8.3 billion in USAID funding for social foreign aid programs abroad, like operas for transgender people and pro-LGBT groups throughout the world, is on the chopping block. The bill was widely supported by conservative members of Congress, though some more moderate GOP lawmakers had concerns about the legislation's deep cuts to the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) and impacts on public broadcasters. It caused a mini civil war among Republicans who weren't totally onboard with the package at first. Vice President JD Vance had to be called into the Senate for a late-night tie-breaking vote to advance the measure on Tuesday. Trump had warned possible defectors that he would not support their re-election if they didn't vote for the bill clawing back the unspent funds. 'It is very important that all Republicans adhere to my Recissions Bill and, in particular, defund the corporation for public broadcasting (PBS and NPR), which is worse than CNN & MSDNC put together,' Trump posted on Truth Social last week. 'Any Republican that votes to allow this monstrosity to continue broadcasting will not have my support or endorsement.' Moderate Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, meanwhile, was not concerned with securing Trump's stamp of approval. During a Senate hearing with the architect of the White House's rescissions bill, Director of the United States Office of Management and Budget Russ Vought (pictured), Collins told the official she cannot support his sweeping budget reforms. 'I cannot support the cuts that are so deep and so damaging in global health programs,' Collins told Vought at the end of June. PEPFAR, which was started under former President George W. Bush, has been credited with saving millions of lives. Collins has said she is looking to amend the WH package to exclude cuts to the AIDS prevention program. I can't imagine why we would want to terminate that program,' she has said. Trump's White House eventually agreed to exempt PEPFAR from the slashes to get wayward Republicans on board. Collins has also questioned the cuts to public broadcasters, which she has noted are important to Maine residents - particularly in emergency situations. The moderate has admitted that NPR has a 'partisan bent' and has called actions from the outlet's president Katherine Maher, including her calling Trump a 'liar' and wearing a Joe Biden hat are 'very troubling.' South Dakota Republican Sen. Mike Rounds took issue with the public broadcasting cuts. 'I can't support this [package] ... until we get the issue resolved with regard to these rural radio stations,' he told CNN. Alaska's two Republican senators, Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan, had also signaled that they would oppose the rescissions package over public broadcasting cuts.
Daily Mail
17-07-2025
- Politics
- Daily Mail
Trump scores big win with $9.4 billion in DOGE-inspired spending cuts gutting 'radical' NPR and PBS
Donald Trump scored another big victory in Congress, this time getting through $9.4 billion in spending cuts on the heels of his 'big, beautiful bill' success. The Republican got his way despite three rebel Republicans - Lisa Murkowski, Alaska, Susan Collins, Maine, and Mitch McConnell, Kentucky - voting against it. It is the first of what GOP leaders expect to be many so-called 'rescission' packages where the White House asks lawmakers to rethink their approval of certain programs. The bill specifically contains 21 budget rescissions, many first identified by DOGE. The $9.4 billion in funds being clawed back includes about $1.1 billion in financing for public broadcasters, like PBS and NPR. It also contains roughly $8.3 billion in USAID funding for social foreign aid programs abroad, like operas for transgender people and pro-LGBT groups throughout the world, is on the chopping block. The bill was widely supported by conservative members of Congress, though some more moderate GOP lawmakers had concerns about the legislation's deep cuts to the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) and impacts on public broadcasters. It caused a mini civil war among Republicans who weren't totally onboard with the package at first. Vice President JD Vance had to be called into the Senate for a late-night tie-breaking vote to advance the measure on Tuesday. Trump had warned possible defectors that he would not support their re-election if they didn't vote for the bill clawing back the unspent funds. 'It is very important that all Republicans adhere to my Recissions Bill and, in particular, defund the corporation for public broadcasting (PBS and NPR), which is worse than CNN & MSDNC put together,' Trump posted on Truth Social last week. 'Any Republican that votes to allow this monstrosity to continue broadcasting will not have my support or endorsement.' Moderate Republican Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, meanwhile, was not concerned with securing Trump's stamp of approval. During a Senate hearing with the architect of the White House's rescissions bill, Director of the United States Office of Management and Budget Russ Vought, Collins told the official she cannot support his sweeping budget reforms. 'I cannot support the cuts that are so deep and so damaging in global health programs,' Collins told Vought at the end of June. PEPFAR, which was started under former President George W. Bush, has been credited with saving millions of lives. Collins has said she is looking to amend the WH package to exclude cuts to the AIDS prevention program. 'I can't imagine why we would want to terminate that program,' she has said. Trump's White House eventually agreed to exempt PEPFAR from the slashes to get wayward Republicans on board. Collins has also questioned the cuts to public broadcasters, which she has noted are important to Maine residents - particularly in emergency situations. The moderate has admitted that NPR has a 'partisan bent' and has called actions from the outlet's president Katherine Maher, including her calling Trump a 'liar' and wearing a Joe Biden hat are 'very troubling.' South Dakota Republican Sen. Mike Rounds took issue with the public broadcasting cuts. 'I can't support this [package] ... until we get the issue resolved with regard to these rural radio stations,' he told CNN. Alaska's two Republican senators, Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan, had also signaled that they would oppose the rescissions package over public broadcasting cuts. Yesterday, I chaired an Appropriations Committee hearing to review the Administration's proposed rescissions package. I questioned OMB Director Russ Vought about the potential effects of the proposed rescissions on life-saving programs, including HIV/AIDS prevention efforts and… — Sen. Susan Collins (@SenatorCollins) June 26, 2025
