As Republicans push to finish the first rescission bill in decades, Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought said he was not prepared to give Democratic senators assurances that future appropriations they approve won’t be clawed back later using rescission.
“No, I’m not,” he said Thursday at an event with reporters hosted by the Christian Science Monitor in response to a question from NOTUS.
“It’s not going to keep me up at night, and I think will lead to better results by having the appropriations process be a little bit partisan, and I don’t think it’s necessarily leading to a shutdown.”
His comments come as the House prepares to vote on a rescission bill that cuts $9 billion in previously approved funds for foreign aid and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and weeks ahead of a government funding deadline. The rescissions package is a key part of the Trump administration’s efforts to cut government spending that is deemed out of line with the administration ideologically — and a major departure from the way the government is typically funded.
Trending
The Trump administration plans to use the method for funding cuts again “soon,” Vought said.
“If this continues to pass, we’re likely to send up another rescissions package that will come soon, and we’ll be working on that to try to get that across the finish line,” he said. “We’re not there yet. I have nothing to announce, but we’ve been talking about it, and there’s certainly enthusiasm.”
Democrats have suggested the rescissions process has damaged the ability of Congress to move forward with appropriations in a bipartisan fashion. Republicans don’t need Democratic votes for a rescissions package, but they do for the next government spending bill, which could mean a government shutdown in the future.
“It will undermine our trust in the system, because Republicans can vote for one thing one day and then collude with President Trump to take it out the next,” Sen. Chris Van Hollen said Tuesday.
The rescissions package has also faced criticism from some Republicans, including Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins, who said it lacked specifics.
“The rescissions package has a big problem – nobody really knows what program reductions are in it,” Collins said in a statement. “That isn’t because we haven’t had time to review the bill. Instead, the problem is that OMB has never provided the details that would normally be part of this process.”
Vought disputed the argument that they were light on details.
“The detail argument was a complete meme,” Vought said. “All right? We gave the same amount of detail and information that previous rescissions patents have had.”
He said he thinks the appropriations process would be improved by being less bipartisan.
“I want to have very good relationships with all Republican appropriators, I’m willing to work with Democrat appropriators if they conduct themselves with decorum,” Vought said. “We’re going to disagree at times, but that doesn’t mean we can’t have a very good relationship, and I do, in fact, have a good relationship with them, but the appropriations process has to be less bipartisan.”
Vought has previously floated pocket rescissions as another way to withhold previously appropriated government funding that bypasses Congress. Pocket rescissions are sent so close to a government funding deadline that Congress has no time to act on them, which effectively leaves the funds frozen.
Vought said use of the method is still under consideration, though he feels they won’t need to utilize pocket rescissions if they can pass normal rescissions packages through Congress.
“So a pocket rescission is no different than a normal rescission, except for the timing of when it occurs,” he said, adding later, “We haven’t made a determination to use it in part, because if we’re making progress during the normal course of business with Congress, and we’re happy to go to great lengths to get this thing done.”
Author
