SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
russell vought
Progressives, Democrats Vow Fight as Senate GOP Aims to Claw Back Billions in Federal Funding
Republicans plan to utilize a rare process called "rescission" to skirt Congress' power of the purse and illegally allow Trump to withhold hundreds of billions of dollars in federal funding to critical programs.
Jul 10, 2025
The U.S. Senate will soon vote on whether President Donald Trump can claw back billions of dollars that have already been appropriated by Congress.
Last month, the House narrowly voted to allow Trump to rescind $9.4 billion in funds that were meant to fund global health initiatives—including AIDS, malaria, and tuberculosis prevention—and public broadcasters like PBS and NPR.
It's far from the first time that this Republican-controlled Congress has voted on massive budget cuts, but progressive groups and some Democratic lawmakers say this vote has another frightening dimension to it.
These funds were among the more than $420 billion appropriated by Congress that Trump illegally impounded, or refused to spend, at the start of his term.
In a letter sent Wednesday to members of Congress, a coalition of more than 100 groups—including Public Citizen, the AFL-CIO, and Greenpeace—warned that by voting to approve these rescissions of federal funds, they would be giving Trump tacit approval to unconstitutionally take away Congress' authority to spend money.
"This rescissions proposal does not ask Congress, as required by the Impoundment Control Act, to approve the entirety of the federal spending that has been illegally frozen by the Trump administration," the letter notes. "The administration is merely trying to establish a veil of legitimacy while it continues unconstitutional actions that it began more than 100 days ago."
The groups went on to warn that allowing the president to unilaterally cut funding that he doesn't approve of "risks irreparable damage to the regular bipartisan appropriations process."
"Despite the political back-and-forth, Congress eventually reaches a bipartisan agreement on government funding every year, one way or another," they said. "The basis for that bipartisan agreement is that both parties must agree to compromises to achieve any of their goals. If a party with a political trifecta can simply rescind funding for the parts of appropriations bills they compromised on, they undermine congressional checks and balances and the basis for future bipartisan dealmaking on an already politically fraught process."
Under the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, presidents are forbidden from unilaterally refusing to spend funds. However, Congress is allowed to pass a "rescission" bill within 45 days of canceling them if the president requests it.
Trump would be the first president since Bill Clinton in 1999 to successfully have funds rescinded by Congress, and it would be the largest rescission in four decades.
But as the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities points out, there is a key difference: "The administration illegally impounded the funds at issue for months before proposing the [rescission] package" and that it is "unlawfully withholding much larger amounts of funding that it has not proposed for rescission."
According to a tracker created by the office of Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) and Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), who sit on the House and Senate appropriations committees, respectively, the Trump administration is blocking congressionally appropriated funds for programs including:
- Research into Alzheimer's disease, women's health, cancer, diabetes, and other illnesses;
- Natural disaster relief;
- School lunch assistance for children;
- Early childhood education through the Head Start Program; and
- Birth control and cancer screenings for over 800,000 patients
Russell Vought, the head of the White House's Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has openly indicated a desire to use rescission to cut all of this spending "without having to get an affirmative vote" from Congress.
According to The New York Times, Vought is planning to use an even more arcane and illegal maneuver known as "pocket rescission" to avoid spending the funds. As Tony Romm reported in June:
Under the emerging plan, the Trump administration would wait until closer to Sept. 30, the end of the fiscal year, to formally ask lawmakers to claw back a set of funds it has targeted for cuts. Even if Congress fails to vote on the request, the president’s timing would trigger a law that freezes the money until it ultimately expires.
Some Senate Democrats have indicated they'd be willing to risk a government shutdown to prevent the rescission bill from passing.
In a letter published Tuesday, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) wrote that the prospect of the rescissions bill passing had "grave implications."
"[I]t is absurd for [Republicans] to expect Democrats to act as business as usual and engage in a bipartisan appropriations process to fund the government, while they concurrently plot to pass a purely partisan rescissions bill to defund those same programs negotiated on a bipartisan basis behind the scenes," Schumer wrote.
Murray called out Vought directly on Wednesday at a markup session on the next round of bills in the Senate Appropriations Committee.
"For us to be able to work in a bipartisan way effectively, that requires us to work with each other. To not just write bipartisan funding bills—but to defend them from partisan cuts sought by the president and the OMB director," she said during her opening remarks. "We cannot allow bipartisan funding bills with partisan rescission packages. It will not work."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Imperiling Lives Worldwide, White House Asks Congress to Claw Back Global Health Funding
"These cuts would condemn countless vulnerable women, children, and families to preventable suffering and death," warned one humanitarian aid alliance.
Jun 04, 2025
The Trump White House on Tuesday formally asked Congress to rescind over $9 billion in approved spending, taking aim at lifesaving foreign aid programs as well as funding for U.S. public broadcasting outlets targeted by the president.
The $9.4 billion rescission request, expected to be the first of several, is laid out in a memo authored by Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought, who wrote that the clawback "would eliminate programs that are antithetical to American interests, such as funding the World Health Organization, LGBTQI+ activities, 'equity' programs, radical Green New Deal-type policies, and color revolutions in hostile places around the world."
The White House request specifically urges Congress to rescind hundreds of millions of dollars from U.S. contributions to United Nations peacekeeping; $500 million from U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) global health programs that fund "activities related to child and maternal health, HIV/AIDS, and infectious diseases"; $800 million from Migration and Refugee Assistance; and $125 million from the Clean Technology Fund.
The request would also eliminate U.S. contributions to the U.N. Children's Fund.
If enacted, the rescissions would compound the damage already done by the Trump administration's lawless assault on USAID, an attack that has had devastating impacts around the world.
Abby Maxman, president and CEO of Oxfam America, said Tuesday that "this attempt to claw back billions of dollars of federal funding already approved by Congress, including lifesaving foreign aid, is yet another deadly setback for communities now left without food, clean water, healthcare, and more."
"The global aid system is already overstretched as need continues to rise," said Maxman. "We are already seeing the life and death impacts of foreign assistance cuts—championed by a handful of the world’s richest people—on women, children, and communities already enduring poverty, hunger, conflict, and disaster."
"We call on Congress to vote 'no' on this reckless rescissions package and uphold longstanding bipartisan commitment to these programs that save untold lives and make the world a better place for us all," Maxman added.
The humanitarian alliance InterAction warned that "these cuts would condemn countless vulnerable women, children, and families to preventable suffering and death—and already have."
"The closing of clinics in South Sudan caused at least five children with cholera to die while trying to access treatment," the alliance said. "In the Democratic Republic of Congo, entire communities were cut off from water, food, and healthcare. Stories like these continue to emerge from across the globe."
"Trump's cuts will save no more than a rounding error, but cost America its credibility, and hundreds of thousands of people their very lives."
The White House package also demands that Congress rescind all $535 million appropriated for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which would cement President Donald Trump's broadside against NPR and PBS. Both outlets are suing the president over his attempt to cut off their federal funding.
U.S. Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), vice chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said the new request "is just the beginning," warning that "next time, it might be funding for cancer research or to help working families afford their energy bills this summer."
"After linking arms with Elon Musk to take a chainsaw to key programs the American people count on, President Trump is now asking Republicans in Congress to rubberstamp his DOGE cuts and codify them into law," said Murray. "In asking Congress to rescind some of the funding he has been illegally blocking for months, Trump is conceding what we've known all along: that Congress—not the president—must approve the rescission or withholding of investments that were signed into law."
Because the rescission process is not subject to the 60-vote Senate filibuster, congressional Republicans can approve the White House's demands without any Democratic support. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) pledged to "bring the package to the floor as quickly as possible."
Peter Maybarduk, Access to Medicines director at Public Citizen, said in a statement Tuesday that the White House proposal marks "a low moment for our country."
"This president, having unconstitutionally obliterated foreign aid, is now asking members of Congress to bless the power he illegally took from them and the destruction he has wrought with it," said Maybarduk. "Trump's cuts will save no more than a rounding error, but cost America its credibility, and hundreds of thousands of people their very lives."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Analysis Finds Majority of Trump Cabinet Tied to Project 2025 Groups
"Project 2025 isn't just influential in Washington. Its friends and creators are literally running the show."
Jun 03, 2025
Despite repeatedly attempting to distance himself from Project 2025 during his reelection campaign, U.S. President Donald Trump's administration employs dozens of senior officials with links to the Heritage Foundation-led plan to expand executive power and shrink the federal government—including a majority of his Cabinet.
That's according to an interactive analysis published Monday by the international climate-focused news outlet DeSmog, which found that more than 50 high-level Trump administration officials have ties to groups behind Project 2025.
That figure includes many of Trump's closest advisers, including Stephen Miller and Elon Musk, who recently stepped down as the de facto head of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency. It also includes 14 out of 24 Cabinet-level officials, or 70% of the Cabinet.
"That's a hugely significant finding," Duke University history and public policy professor Nancy MacLean told DeSmog. "In Heritage's own longtime language, 'personnel is policy.' It shows the incredible bad faith of Trump's denials, because this is who he stocked his administration with."
🚨 NEW INVESTIGATION: We mapped the Trump administration's ties to Project 2025 and found something stunning—70% of his Cabinet is connected to the groups behind the Heritage Foundation plan. This despite Trump's repeated denials during the campaign. 🧵
— DeSmog (@desmog.com) June 3, 2025 at 6:19 AM
The analysis notes:
Some of the officials directly authored parts of "The Mandate for Leadership," the now-notorious, 900-page proposal to "dismantle the administrative state"—the meat of Project 2025. Others recently worked for, donated to, or otherwise collaborated with one or more of the dozens of conservative groups that created the distinctly Christian nationalist-flavored document. Some of these high-ranking officials have connections to five or more different Project 2025 groups.
"In other words, Project 2025 isn't just influential in Washington. Its friends and creators are literally running the show," DeSmog said. "Which helps to explain why the Trump administration has worked swiftly to implement the vision described in the 'Mandate.'"
DeSmog countered Trump's claims to "know nothing about Project 2025" or "who is behind it" by highlighting a host of his administration's policies and practices that track the the initiative. At least 140 people who worked in Trump's first administration—including six former Cabinet secretaries—have also been involved with Project 2025.
Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought co-authored the policy portion of Project 2025, which includes dramatic cuts to critical public programs, abolishing or gutting essential government agencies, a national abortion ban, and a litany of additional far-right wish list items.
Vought is lying. 60-70% of Project 2025's executive action proposals have been initiated or implemented — like gutting education and environmental laws. 30-40% is currently proposed as legislation — gutting healthcare, banking deregulations, voter suppression, and more.
[image or embed]
— Melanie D’Arrigo (@darrigomelanie.bsky.social) June 1, 2025 at 7:03 AM
"From across-the-board tariffs to the mass firing of tens of thousands of federal workers to attacking inclusive language and initiatives, from gutting whole agencies and departments to dramatically stepping up the rate of deportations to the broad-scale rollback of environmental regulations and initiatives, a clear pattern has emerged: if the Trump administration's doing it, Project 2025 probably spelled it out first," the outlet said.
"This matters because Americans overwhelmingly rejected Project 2025," DeSmog contented in a post on the social media site Bluesky. "A pre-election survey showed 4% approval. Trump wouldn't touch it. Yet the plan's architects and allies now run the executive branch."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular