Long before Republicans and Democrats reached the stalemate that has shut down the government, President Trump made it clear that he was willing to ignore Congress’s constitutional power to allocate federal spending.
His Department of Government Efficiency took a hacksaw to the federal bureaucracy with little consultation and no sign-off by the Republican-controlled Congress. He pushed through legislation to officially claw back billions of dollars lawmakers had appropriated, a rare move that he and his advisers, as well as the House speaker, have promised he will resort to again.
So as the shutdown enters its third week with no resolution in sight, it has become increasingly evident to lawmakers in both parties that one serious obstacle to striking a spending deal to reopen the government is the possibility — maybe even certainty — that Mr. Trump will simply turn around and ignore it, as he has repeatedly ignored Congress’s will on spending this year.
With Mr. Trump and Russell T. Vought, his director of the Office of Management and Budget, promising to pursue more rescissions — deep cuts proposed by the White House in spending already blessed by Congress — Democrats are effectively being asked to sign onto a deal that they know can be unilaterally undone by a defiant president and a compliant Republican majority.
“Does it make it harder to come to terms on hard things like a government shutdown?” Senator Lisa Murkowski, Republican of Alaska, asked about the prospect of rescissions. “Absolutely.”
That fundamental lack of trust looms large as members of both parties settle in for what is looking like a long shutdown fight.
Senate Democrats on Thursday blocked for the 10th time the House-passed G.O.P. stopgap spending bill needed to reopen the government, showing no signs of relenting on their demand that Republicans negotiate an extension of Obamacare subsidies set to expire at the end of the year.
Fueling the standoff is Democrats’ anger at the White House’s repeated efforts to unilaterally cancel congressionally appropriated spending that Mr. Trump says is at odds with his political agenda, while repurposing other funds to insulate agencies he supports. After pushing through a rescissions bill over the summer to cancel some $9 billion that Congress had approved, Mr. Trump last month informed lawmakers he planned to claw back another roughly $5 billion in foreign aid at the end of the fiscal year, using a maneuver known as a pocket rescission that left no time for them to object.
Mr. Trump has only accelerated his campaign to usurp Congress’ spending power during the shutdown, including announcing a series of moves to pause or cancel nearly $28 billion in funding that primarily benefited Democratic-led cities and states, and firing thousands of federal workers. At the same time, he has cushioned the blow for agencies and constituencies he supports, including signing a memorandum on Thursday that significantly expands his authority to repurpose unspent federal funds to pay members of the military during the shutdown.
“We got the people that we want paid, paid,” Mr. Trump said. “We want the F.B.I. paid,” he added. “We want the military paid. We got the people that we want paid.”
Speaker Mike Johnson last week offered a striking reminder about the spending feud underlying the shutdown fight when he disclosed that there would be more rescissions coming “in the days ahead,” citing them on a menu of potential actions to reduce budget deficits.
“We are doing everything we can in every possible way to get us back to sound fiscal responsibility,” Mr. Johnson said. “We have to reduce spending,” he added, calling rescissions “part of our process.”
That prospect galled Democrats, who note that while spending bills need 60 votes to advance in the Senate, requiring some level of buy-in from their side, rescissions can be pushed through with a simple majority vote — as happened over the summer with near-unanimous Republican support — leaving the minority powerless to stop them.
“If any one person can unilaterally undo it, what’s the point of coming to the agreement? And to make it worse, the person who has that unilateral power is Vought,” said Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the minority leader, referring to the budget director. “And he can make it happen through pocket rescissions and through these impoundments. So we feel, really, that this has thrown a huge, huge impediment to getting appropriations bills done.”
Representative Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the Democratic leader, called the specter of more unilateral cuts by Mr. Trump “another indication that Republicans are not operating in good faith.”
“The notion that in the midst of us trying to reopen the government and find a bipartisan path forward, the speaker of the House would threaten additional rescissions and essentially say anything we agree to is not worth the paper it is written on,” Mr. Jeffries said, “is extraordinary.”
A handful of Republicans, including Ms. Murkowski and Senator Susan Collins of Maine, the chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee, have opposed the rescissions sent to Congress from the White House. They argue that any cuts in previously approved spending should be negotiated as part of the regular spending bills, as is done routinely. Rescission packages from the White House had been relatively rare in recent years, until Mr. Trump returned to office.
“The only way we should be doing rescissions is through the regular appropriations process, not by circumventing it,” Ms. Collins said.
Democrats have said that any deal to resolve the impasse should include legislation barring the White House from pursuing rescissions and requiring the administration to spend money as Congress directs.
But Republicans said they doubted that they would be able to muster enough support to safeguard a compromise spending bill from being undercut by rescissions. They also say the White House is unlikely to back anything that limits its ability to spend as it sees fit as it continues to test the constitutional power of the purse.
“I don’t think the president’s going to sign a bill that has language like that and that ties his hands,” said Senator John Boozman, Republican of Arkansas and an appropriator. “It’s just something we’re going to have to work through. But I don’t think there are any safeguards that you can put in a bill that would get the votes that it needs to pass, or that the president would sign.”
Still, Senate Democrats who are pushing to bring Republicans to the negotiating table on the health care subsidies say that the issue would not derail a deal, if there was one to be had.
“Do rescissions loom large? Yes. Does O.M.B.’s behavior make things complicated? Yes,” said Senator Brian Schatz, Democrat of Hawaii. “But all of that could be obviated if Donald Trump himself decides that he doesn’t want 24 million Americans to see their premiums double.”
Catie Edmondson covers Congress for The Times.
Carl Hulse is the chief Washington correspondent for The Times, primarily writing about Congress and national political races and issues. He has nearly four decades of experience reporting in the nation’s capital.
The post Trump’s Unilateral Spending Cuts Complicate Shutdown Deal appeared first on New York Times.
