Want to Guess How Long JD Vance's Bluesky Account Lasted?
How Ted Cruz Responded to Tucker Carlson's Ridiculous 'Gotcha' Clip
Hackers Just Took Over Iran’s State TV — Here’s What They Had to...
Just Wait Until Liberals Learn About Syllogisms
Miamians Agree: Holding Elections When No One Votes Is Broken Governance
Jerry Nadler Tries and Fails to Get Into ICE Facility, and It Gets...
Even After SCOTUS Loss, Advocates of Mutilating Minors Are Still Doubling Down
Devastating Video Reminds Democrats How They Covered Up for Biden's Mental Failings
Democrat Who Blames Trump Over Iran Gets Quite the Reminder From Scott Walker
President Trump Will Extend Deadline for TikTok Ban Again
Do We Really Need Kathy Hochul Weighing In on Brad Lander's Arrest?
Obama Felt the Need to Rant About 'Commitment' to 'Liberal Democracies,' Warn About...
Texan Arrested for Allegedly Buying Fireworks for LA Protests
NYC Mayoral Candidate Zohran Mamdani Defends ‘Globalize the Intifada’
The Results Are in: Here’s the Worst-Run Major City in America
Tipsheet

They Said the DOGE Vote Was Coming. Thomas Massie Explains Why It Didn't.

AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) last week explained that a vote on slashing the wasteful spending the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) discovered did not happen.

Advertisement

The legislature was set to vote on a slew of recommendations coming from DOGE related to cutting government spending. However, Massie indicated in a post on X that the vote had been “quietly canceled.”

This wasn’t widely covered in the news, so I will tell you: 

Congress was scheduled to vote on rescissions THIS WEEK to cut the waste that DOGE found, but the votes were quietly canceled.

USAID and other programs like PBS and NPR were to be targeted.

The lawmaker indicated that Congress canceled the vote at House Speaker Mike Johnson’s (R-LA) behest in response to an X user asking why there was no vote on the matter.

John Kennedy, Massie’s communications director, told Townhall that the lawmaker is eager to vote for spending cuts. “Rep. Massie would vote for the proposed $9.3 billion rescissions package and is frustrated by Speaker Johnson’s failure to bring these proposed cuts to the floor for a vote,” he explained in an email.

It appears Congress may still vote on a rescissions package this week, according to a CBS News report.

The White House is expected to send Congress a rescissions package in the coming days, looking to claw back congressionally approved funding amid a broader effort to dramatically slash spending.

As the administration faces legal challenges to its efforts to slash the U.S. Agency for International Development, public broadcasting and other programs, the White House is looking to Congress to formalize the process and put it on a stronger legal footing.

Advertisement

The rescission process allows the president to propose the cancelation of specific budget appropriations or funds that Congress has already allocated. 

The process starts with the president submitting a message to Congress within 45 days of signing an appropriations bill. The White House identifies funds that it wishes to cancel and gives a reason for rescinding them.

The legislature has 45 days to consider the president’s request. The rescission bill goes through the typical legislative process and requires a simple majority in the House and Senate to pass. This rarely happens because lawmakers are hesitant to approve cuts to funding for programs they may have previously supported.

Despite canceling the earlier vote, Johnson indicated he is “anxiously awaiting a rescission package” and that he believes Congress will pass a rescissions package for the 2025 fiscal year, according to CBS News.

Sen. Majority Whip John Barrasso said last week that “There’s a lot of wasteful Washington spending, and people at home want to make sure we get rid of it.”

The White House package is expected to ask Congress to cancel around $9 billion, seeking to make permanent some of the spending that Elon Musk and Mr. Trump's Department of Government Efficiency have slashed in recent months.

The recission package would likely be only a fraction of the cuts, with an expected focus on foreign aid money from the U.S. Agency for International Development, or USAID, along with funding for major public broadcasting systems, including NPR and PBS. But the final product remains to be seen, and could pose hurdles for passage in narrowly held Republican majorities in the House and Senate. 

Sen. Jim Banks, an Indiana Republican, said on Fox News in May that Musk and DOGE did the "hard part" by identifying the "wasteful spending."

"Now Congress has to do the easy part and claw that back and make those cuts permanent," Banks said.

Advertisement

While the passing of rescission packages is a rarity, President Ronald Reagan had some success. His administration proposed 101 rescissions in 1981. Congress approved each request. The administration issued more rescission requests in 1985. Congress approved some of them.

The Clinton administration proposed three rescissions in 2000. Congress did not approve these.

During his first term, President Donald Trump proposed a $15.3 billion rescission package in May 2018. The Senate rejected his proposal on a 48-50 vote. Republican Sens. Susan Collins (R-ME) and Richard Burr (R-NC) joined Democrats in voting against the cuts.

There is nothing surprising here, from where I sit. When the DOGE initiative was first announced, I had my doubts about its ability to actually cut government spending. I figured that the team would identify some particularly egregious examples of how our government uses the money it takes from us — and DOGE delivered.

However, the executive branch can only do so much to cut spending. DOGE can’t make a difference unless Congress is willing to shrink the size of government — an endeavor that hasn’t been accomplished to a significant degree at any point in recent memory. I hope to be wrong about this, but I do not believe our lawmakers — even those who claim to support “limited government — will vote to rescind much of the funding the Trump administration has highlighted.

We have seen this movie before, haven’t we? Lawmakers promise to slash spending on the campaign trail, then they continue spending like inebriated seamen once they get into office. Of course, they might just surprise me — if they ever get around to voting on the matter. If this happens, I will happily dine on crow with copious amounts of hot sauce.

Advertisement

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement