Pocket Rescissions, Latest Tactic from the Executive Branch, Are Unconstitutional

On Friday, August 29, the White House declared it was going to cancel $4.9 billion in congressionally approved foreign aid by using a tactic called "pocket rescissions." Through this action, the executive branch is overstepping Congress' power of the purse in an attempt to control the United States government's spending process.

To truly honor the democratic processes of this country, and the constitution on which it was founded, the Executive should not be able to use pocket rescissions to unilaterally and unlawfully withhold already approved funding.

You aren't alone if you're unsure what a pocket rescission is. This method hasn't been used by a president since 1983-and never in this way-so it's not surprising that many voters aren't aware of what it entails.

So, what are pocket rescissions?

Under the current rules of the Impoundment Control Act (ICA), federal funds may be withheld from obligation for up to 45 days through a process called rescissions. Once a rescissions package has been shared with Congress, they have the opportunity to act by voting for, against, or not voting at all on the proposed cuts. If Congress fails to act, the President must make the funds available to be spent.

We saw this play out in July when Congress voted on-and passed-the Trump administration's $9 billion rescissions package that made significant cuts to foreign aid and public broadcasting.

Separately, a "pocket rescission" can only occur when funds are set to expire. The standard rescissions procedure allows Congress to have the final say. With pocket rescissions, this is different. Instead, the president waits until late in the fiscal year to propose a funding cut. Then, when the fiscal year ends on September 30, the expiring funding lapses and cannot be paid out-regardless of Congressional action.

This system puts Congress in a bind because even if they were to vote down the president's proposal the next day, the president is still able to pause the funds for 45 days.

According to the Center for American Progress, to "deliberately freeze significant portions of budget authority until it lapses this way is illegal and a violation of the president's constitutional duty to carry out the law."

The Government Accountability Office has also explained that pocket rescissions are against the law, despite protests from Russell Vought, director of the Office of Management and Budget. If the ICA allowed the president to use a loophole to withhold funds without Congress's consent, it would give the executive limitless impoundment power and allow them to dictate spending without Congressional input.

What is happening now?

The Trump administration has announced it will revoke nearly $5 billion in congressionally approved spending by utilizing this unlawful strategy. His proposal includes the termination of $3.2 billion in development assistance, $521 million in contributions to international organizations-including the Pan American Health Organization, the Americas branch of the World Health Organization-$393 million for peacekeeping activities, and $445 million in separately budgeted peacekeeping aid. This funding had been frozen earlier this year and remained unspent, even against a court injunction.

Of note, Republican Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins responded to this action with a statement that, "any effort to rescind appropriated funds without congressional approval is a clear violation of the law."

Politicians, scholars, and advocates fear that should the executive succeed in this pocket rescission, it will set a precedent that would codify this maneuver to make it easier for future use. If we allow pocket rescissions to cut foreign aid funding now, any spending-including health care in the U.S., education, and defense-could be at risk in the future.

What can I do?

The Trump administration has been withholding funds for lifesaving programs since January. Right now, Congress has a great deal of power to prevent these pocket rescissions from terminating this funding completely. The Office of Budget Management is relying on the current language in the ICA to support the legality of pocket rescissions. Congress can amend this phrasing, however, and effectively block future attempts at this maneuver.

You can contact your elected officials to share your frustration with pocket rescissions, remind them of the power they have to change it, and why you care that global health funding-that Congress has already approved-is properly spent.

Get Involved

Send an email to your Senators and Representatives to urge them to act today!

Contact Congress