Washington, D.C. — The Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Russ Vought has indicated his intent to implement one or more “pocket rescissions”—an illegal budgetary maneuver that, ironically, misuses an aspect of the Impoundment Control Act (ICA) to permanently impound funds. This would irreversibly prevent funds that were appropriated by Congress and enacted by the president from being spent on subsequent legislation.
A new Center for American Progress article reviews what a pocket rescission is, how it is illegal, and how Russ Vought is attempting to use this illegal maneuver. The timing and targets of sending a special message to Congress asking for Congress to claw back funding will indicate whether Vought is pursuing unlawful unilateral cancellations. This column also answers the following frequently asked questions about rescissions and federal funding. The questions answered in this column include:
- What a rescission is and what is required when funding is appropriated
- How a pocket rescission works and what makes something a pocket rescission
- Why pocket rescissions are illegal and when they’ve been used in the past
“So-called ‘pocket rescissions’ are unlawful and unconstitutional impoundments. The president does not have the power to unilaterally break budget laws,” said Bobby Kogan, senior director of federal budget policy. “The president cannot just refuse to spend money to carry out legally required activities and functions that Congress already appropriated.”
Read the column: “What Is a Pocket Rescission?” by Bobby Kogan
For more information or to speak with an expert, please contact Sarah Nadeau at [email protected].