The issue of pocket rescissions may seem peripheral or even irrelevant, given the big picture backdrop of a government teetering on the brink this month. But it actually has major significance, since it raises new questions and possibilities over who controls the government’s purse strings.
The Impoundment Control Act of 1974 allows presidents to submit proposed current fiscal year rescissions (funding cancellations) for a 45-day review period during which Congress may approve, disapprove or modify the request. If Congress does not act on the rescission proposals, the money must be released for its intended purposes.
A pocket rescission comes into the picture when the president proposes to rescind the money within 45 days of when the fiscal year expires — which is to say, any time between now and 11:59 p.m. on Sept. 30. Trump’s position is that, absent congressional action, a cancellation of previously appropriated funding is thereby baked into final budget totals. Congress, on the other hand, insists that it can still address the matter retroactively through the appropriations process.
…
[OMB Director Russ] Vought has long argued that, once the president has signed congressionally appropriated funds into law, he has complete discretion to use them or not, as he wishes. If this unitary executive theory prevails in the courts, it will give new meaning to the term, “checks and balances” — Congress writes the checks while the president controls the balances.
