Trump Relieves Congress Of Power Of Purse

President Donald Trump rescued Congress from the exhausting burden of having its laws mean anything, canceling $810 million that lawmakers had already approved for health, education, housing and immigrant services. The Sept. 25 pocket rescission targeted 11 appropriations accounts, including $567 million for refugee resettlement, $70 million for international education, $56 million for housing counseling and $28 million for health research. By announcing the cuts five days before the fiscal year ended, Trump gave lawmakers nearly enough time to locate their constitutional authority before it expired.

Trump described the maneuver as an efficiency upgrade to representative government. “Congress voted, I signed it, and then I unsign the money without another vote, which is tremendous democracy because nobody has to represent anybody twice,” Trump said. Administration officials explained that congressional approval remains essential for spending decisions right up until the moment the president finds it inconvenient. The revised system preserves the pageantry of legislating while eliminating its chief defect: legislation.

The Government Accountability Office objected Tuesday, arguing that the maneuver violated federal law and subverted Congress’s constitutional power of the purse. Legal experts sympathetic to the White House dismissed that conclusion as nostalgia for the abandoned theory that appropriations passed by lawmakers and signed by a president become law. Under the administration’s more modern interpretation, a statute is merely a first draft of an executive preference, printed at taxpayer expense so the president has something official to disregard.

Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins called the cancellations unlawful, while Rep. Brendan Boyle said a president may not simply ignore Congress. Their statements fulfilled the legislative branch’s current constitutional duty to express grave concern after surrendering the relevant power. Senate Majority Leader John Thune suggested the courts could settle the dispute, preserving the nation’s checks-and-balances system in which Congress passes a law, the president discards it and judges spend several years determining whether nouns retain legal force. Officials praised the savings, noting that democracy becomes dramatically cheaper once elected lawmakers are decorative.

* None of the quotes in this article were spoken by an actual person. More info.