4 hours ago

Susan Collins Rips Trump’s ‘Unlawful’ Effort To Cancel $5 Billion In Foreign Aid

WASHINGTON – Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) fired a warning shot on Friday as the White House moves forward with trying to cancel nearly $5 billion in foreign aid that lawmakers had already approved, saying the move is a “clear violation of the law.”

Collins, who chairs the Senate Appropriations Committee, said the Trump administration just sent Congress a package of so-called “recissions,” or a request for lawmakers to cancel funds they had previously approved and sent out the door. In this case, President Donald Trump is reportedly trying to take back $3.2 billion from USAID programs, $393 million from State Department peacekeeping activities, $322 million from the State Department’s Democracy Fund, and more than $444 million in other peacekeeping aid.

Typically, with rescissions packages, Congress has 45 days to approve or reject a president’s request. If Congress takes no action, the funds remain spent. But in this case, the White House is intentionally jamming Congress: it sent over its rescission request within 45 days of the end of the fiscal year. If Congress doesn’t vote to reject his request before the fiscal year ends on Sept. 30, these funds will expire and be automatically canceled.

In a statement, Collins said Trump’s so-called “pocket rescission” is an attempt to bypass Congress’ role in approving funding — and is plainly illegal, as spelled out by the Government Accountability Office.

“GAO has concluded that this type of rescission is unlawful and not permitted by the Impoundment Control Act,” said the Maine Republican. “Article I of the Constitution makes clear that Congress has the responsibility for the power of the purse. Any effort to rescind appropriated funds without congressional approval is a clear violation of the law.”

The “appropriate way” to cut spending is through “the bipartisan, annual appropriations process,” she said. “Congress approves rescissions regularly as part of this process. In fact, the year-long funding bill that we are currently operating under includes 70 rescissions.”

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) is pushing back on the Trump administration's effort, orchestrated by Project 2025 architect Russ Vought, right, to claw back billions of dollars in foreign aid that Congress already appropriated, saying it's

Trump’s efforts to bigfoot Congress are being orchestrated by Russ Vought, the powerful, behind-the-scenes director of the Office of Management and Budget. Vought, one of the architects of Project 2025, the far-right policy blueprint for Trump’s second term, signaled last month that he’s ready to lean on rescissions to push the limits of Trump’s authority.

“I’m not sure the Impoundment Control Act is constitutional. My belief is that it is not,” Vought said at a Christian Science Monitor event in July. “You have these procedures that have fallen into disuse. Why wouldn’t you use them to send up rescissions?”

He called rescissions packages “one of the executive tools” that remain on the table for the White House.

“The president was elected to get us to balance, to deal with our fiscal situation,” Vought said. “We’re going to use all of the tools that are there.”

On Friday, Democrats called on Republicans to join them in rejecting the package outright, reminding them it’s both illegal and an attempt to strip power from Congress.

“Republicans should not accept Russ Vought’s brazen attempt to usurp their own power,” Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, said in a statement.

“No president has a line item veto – and certainly not a retroactive line item veto,” she said. “Congress should reject this request and this ridiculous, illegal maneuver – and instead insist on making decisions over spending through the bipartisan appropriations process.”

Other Republicans in Congress have previously said pocket rescissions are unlawful. Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho), who chairs a House appropriations subcommittee, called them “illegal” and “a bad idea” that “undermines Congress’ authority.”

During Vought’s Senate nomination hearing in January, Murray pressed himon his views on the legality of the Impoundment Control Act. He was squirrelly with his responses, but conceded the law is constitutional.

“Has the impoundment law ever been said to be unconstitutional by a court of law?” Murray asked.

“Not to my knowledge,” Vought said.

“It has not. So it is the law of the land,” she replied. “I don’t care what the president said when he was running — it is the law of the land.”