Trump’s Plan to Challenge Federal Budget Control

President-elect Donald Trump’s budget challenge has outlined several strategies to reduce the size of the federal government, including dismantling the Department of Education and empowering two wealthy allies to form an unofficial Department of Government Efficiency. He also plans to trim the bureaucratic structure that oversees government regulations. One of his most controversial proposals involves withholding some funds allocated by Congress.

A Bold Approach Defying Congressional Appropriations

Trump has challenged congressional appropriations for over a year, signaling a direct conflict with Washington’s power structure. Traditionally, Congress controls fiscal allocations, yet Trump’s plan seeks to bypass this authority. By withholding funds, known as “impounding,” he aims to reduce the federal budget. However, a 50-year-old law prohibits such actions, complicating his strategy.

Constitutional Foundations of Congressional Spending Power

The U.S. Constitution grants Congress authority over federal spending, ensuring democratic control over finances. James Madison, a Founding Father, emphasized its importance. He argued this power prevents the rise of a monarchic system. In 1788, he called it “the most complete and effectual weapon” for safeguarding democracy.

Historical Precedents of Presidential Discretion

Historically, presidents have sought to exercise discretion over fiscal matters, but their interpretations of what it means to “faithfully execute the laws” have sometimes clashed with Congress. Legal debates between the White House, Congress, and the judiciary have revolved around the extent of presidential discretion in withholding funds appropriated by Congress.

Trump’s Victory A Paradox of Broad Gains and Future Risks

The most striking aspect of Donald Trump’s victory over Vice President Kamala Harris was the broad consistency of his gains across the electoral map.

Nixon’s Precedent and the 1974 Law

In the early 1970s, President Richard Nixon attempted to impound billions of dollars in funds to curb inflation. His actions sparked a legal battle, leading Congress to pass the Impoundment Control Act of 1974. This law reaffirmed Congress’s power over spending and created a fast-track process for presidential override of appropriations. It also allowed the U.S. comptroller general to sue the president for unauthorized fund withholding.

Trump’s Challenge to the Impoundment Control Act

Trump has publicly targeted the Impoundment Control Act, declaring in a 2023 campaign video, “When I return to the White House, I will do everything I can to challenge the Impoundment Control Act in court, and, if necessary, get Congress to overturn it.” This suggests he may file a lawsuit challenging the law’s constitutionality or implement spending cuts in violation of it, potentially triggering legal challenges.

Debate Over the Impoundment Power

Supporters of Trump’s position argue that the Impoundment Control Act restricts executive authority. They contend that appropriations represent a ceiling, not a minimum, for spending. On the other hand, opponents believe granting impoundment powers to the president could erode Congress’s control over federal funds, leading to near-monarchical powers for the executive.

Legal Uncertainty and Constitutional Crisis

The issue of impoundment could lead to a constitutional crisis, similar to the 1998 Supreme Court ruling. That ruling declared the line-item veto law unconstitutional, as it infringed on Congress’s powers. This law granted the president veto power over specific appropriations, upsetting the balance of power. Given today’s Supreme Court composition, the outcome of a potential impoundment case remains uncertain. Consequently, this issue could shape future interpretations of presidential authority.

Trump’s budget challenge aims to reduce government size, streamline regulations, and limit congressional fund allocation, according to wall street journal subscription.