President Trump’s blanket pause on foreign aid, grants, loans and other pots of federal financial assistance that might clash with his administration’s agenda poses a direct challenge to Congress, which approved the funds and directed where they ought to be spent.
While presidents traditionally submit requests to Congress to spend taxpayer money in a way that aligns with their governing objectives, the Constitution vests the power of the purse exclusively in the legislative branch — meaning that when it comes to federal spending, it’s the lawmakers who get to call the shots, and the executive branch that is supposed to implement their orders.
In practice, however, presidents and Congresses have often butted heads over this seemingly straightforward arrangement, particularly when the administration elects to withhold money that lawmakers have directed be spent — a move known as impoundment. And while there are statutory guidelines to how far presidents can push back against Congress when it comes to spending, Mr. Trump’s across-the-board move may test whether they are strong enough to restrain a president determined to have his way.
Here’s more about the roles each branch plays in funding the government, and directing how federal dollars are spent.
Congress decides what deserves funding, and how much.
The Constitution gives Congress the authority to appropriate funds — a function often referred to as the “power of the purse,” which derives from the Article I instruction that “no money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by law.” Spending bills originate in the House of Representatives, and like other legislation, have to be approved by both the House and the Senate before they can be signed by the president and take effect.
Congress traditionally aims to pass spending bills on an annual basis, with emergency appropriations to supplement any surprises that demand the government’s financial attention in between times. But that hasn’t been the way it’s worked lately: Right now, federal government spending is operating under what is known as a continuing resolution, which extends funding levels until a deadline set by lawmakers. It expires March 14.
The president’s role is to request money, and then spend it.
Presidential administrations typically make annual budget requests of Congress, usually near the start of the calendar year, in an attempt to outline their overall priorities and influence the way lawmakers go about appropriating funds. They also make periodic requests of Congress for additional spending as needs arise for things such as wars or responses to natural disasters.
The White House’s role is then to oversee the distribution of the funds that Congress actually appropriates, to make sure that spending levels do not exceed congressionally mandated limits, and that the executive branch is spending them in the spirit in which lawmakers intended.
Presidents can challenge Congress’s will when it comes to spending, but there are limits.
Many presidents have sought to delay or even rescind funding. Mr. Trump’s advisers have even argued that he has the inherent power to stop federal spending in its tracks. But there are steps presidents are supposed to follow when holding back funds, which are outlined in the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, which Congress passed after President Richard Nixon tried to impound about a third of congressionally appropriated discretionary domestic spending in order to advance his policy goals.
According to that law, presidents who want to “defer any budget authority” must send Congress a “special message” outlining exactly what spending they seek to defer, for how long, the reasons for the deferral, and the expected impact. If the president wants to rescind the funding, he or she also has to tell Congress, which then has 45 days to approve the president’s proposed cuts, or the money has to be spent.
Democrats are angry. But, so far, the Republican leaders of Congress are not criticizing Trump’s move.
Because Congress ultimately has the power to approve or reject a president’s move to freeze or claw back federal funds, how lawmakers react to Mr. Trump’s move is important. Democrats are up in arms over his actions, accusing him of acting unlawfully, unconstitutionally and recklessly. But some Republican leaders have actually cheered on his decision to halt foreign aid, telling reporters he is doing what he was elected to do.