Trump Employs Little-Used Maneuver To Claw Back Funding For Dem-Favored Programs

President Donald Trump is seeking to eliminate $810 million in previously approved federal spending, advancing a new round of cuts aimed at programs his administration considers unnecessary, ideologically driven or disconnected from the interests of American taxpayers.

The White House unveiled the package Friday, identifying 11 proposed rescissions across six Cabinet departments and international assistance accounts. The targeted funding covers migrant and refugee services, education, housing counseling, minority-business initiatives and other federal activities.

The move also renews a confrontation over presidential spending authority. Trump is employing a maneuver known as a “pocket rescission,” submitting the request shortly before the money expires at the end of the fiscal year.

It is his administration’s second use of the approach, which had remained unused for nearly five decades before Trump revived it last year.

“In accordance with the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974, I herewith report 11 rescissions of budget authority, totaling $810 million,” Trump wrote in his notice to Congress.

More than two-thirds of the proposed reductions involve Department of Health and Human Services funding.

“The largest pot — $567 million appropriated for HHS to provide social services to illegal immigrants, including through grants to non-government organizations — was deemed to be no longer necessary because of the near-elimination of illegal border crossings in the past year,” the New York Post reported.

“Some of the organizations that had received funds through the program drew controversy over their political connections to Democrats and their alleged tolerance of child abuse,” The Post, which first reported the proposed rescission, added.

The administration argues that the sharp decline in illegal border crossings has reduced the need for those expenditures. It also accused some federally funded nongovernmental organizations of supporting policies that encouraged illegal immigration.

An additional $10 million in proposed cuts would come from Department of Homeland Security programs offering legal assistance and other services to illegal immigrants.

In outlining its objections, the administration singled out grants to the National Partnership for New Americans, Instituto del Progreso Latino, the Immigration Institute of the Bay Area and the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition.

Education spending is another substantial component of the package.

Trump proposed withdrawing $25 million from the Education Department’s Special Programs for Migrant Students. According to the White House, earlier awards financed activities that included mental-health services for migrants and programming directed toward LGBTQ migrant students.

A separate $70 million reduction would affect international education grants and fellowship programs.

The package would also remove approximately $15 million from the Justice Department’s Community Relations Service, an office the administration moved to close earlier this year.

Created under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the service was established to help communities address and prevent conflicts involving race, religion, national origin, gender identity and other issues. The White House contends that its work has promoted divisive approaches to race and gender.

Additional reductions would reach housing-counseling programs at the Department of Housing and Urban Development, Commerce Department minority-business development initiatives, HHS research grants and international assistance programs.

Taken together, the proposals reflect the administration’s effort to bring federal expenditures into line with Trump’s priorities and withdraw support from activities it says do not justify their cost to taxpayers.

“President Trump is committed to utilizing all possible tools to cut wasteful and harmful government spending that does not benefit American citizens,” the White House said.

The dispute extends beyond the merits of individual programs, however. At its center is whether the executive branch can withhold appropriated money long enough for it to expire without Congress approving the cancellation.

The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 allows presidents to submit rescission requests asking lawmakers to withdraw previously enacted funding. Congress normally has 45 legislative days to consider such a request. If lawmakers decline to approve it, the administration is generally required to make the money available.

The timing of Trump’s submission creates the confrontation.

The request arrived Friday, just five days before the Sept. 30 end of the federal fiscal year. The administration’s position is that it may hold the affected funds during the congressional review period, even though the money would expire before that period concludes.

Under that interpretation, the funding could lapse without lawmakers ever voting to approve the proposed cuts.

The Government Accountability Office has rejected that reading of the law. Its position is that the administration cannot use an approaching expiration date to accomplish a cancellation that requires congressional consent.

The competing interpretations raise the prospect of another court fight over the limits of presidential authority to withhold federal spending.

Opposition also emerged from within Trump’s party. Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, the Republican chairwoman of the Senate Appropriations Committee and a frequent critic of the president, challenged the maneuver Friday.

“Any effort to rescind appropriated funds without congressional approval is a clear violation of the law,” Collins said.

The White House maintains that the 1974 statute authorizes its approach. With the fiscal year drawing to a close, the administration is pressing forward with its effort to eliminate the funding, while congressional critics contest its authority to do so without their approval.