Latest news with #MikeSimpson
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Trump team's ‘pocket rescission' idea runs into GOP opposition
Some Republicans in Congress are uneasy about the possibility the Trump administration will use a 'pocket rescission' to claw back already approved government funding as fears of a fall shutdown rise. The Trump administration has already clawed back funds through the use of a rescissions package that passed both chambers of Congress, and some GOP lawmakers are concerned about having to vote on a second, possibly politically tougher, package of cuts. But these lawmakers say the use of pocket rescissions, an idea floated by the White House's budget chief that could yank back money without input from lawmakers, could create bad feelings not only with Democrats, but also with Republicans. 'Pocket rescissions, I think, are unconstitutional,' said Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho), a spending cardinal, this week. 'So, just like impoundment, I think, is unconstitutional.' 'So we'll see how it goes,' he said. Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought referred to pocket rescissions as 'one of the executive tools' that are 'on the table' earlier this month, as the administration continues a sweeping operation aimed at reducing federal spending. 'The president was elected to get us to balance, to deal with our fiscal situation, and we're going to use all of the tools that are there depending on the situation, and as we move through the year,' he said at an event. However, he also noted then that the administration hasn't yet 'made a determination to use it in part because we're making progress during the normal course of business with Congress.' Trump became the first president in decades to successfully claw back funds through the special rescissions process, with the GOP-led Congress agreeing to pull back about $9 billion in previously allocated funding for foreign aid and public broadcasting. The Impoundment Control Act (ICA) lays out rules governing that process and allows the administration to temporarily withhold funding for 45 days while Congress considers the request. If Congress opts not to approve the request in the timeframe, the funds must be released. Under a pocket rescission, however, experts say the president would send the same type of request to Congress, but do so within 45 days of the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30. The targeted funds could then essentially be held until the clock runs out and they expire. Vought has described the tactic as 'no different than a normal rescission, except for the timing of when it occurs.' 'A pocket rescission occurs later in the end of the fiscal year, within 45 days of the time that you have to hold the funding, and then the money evaporates at the end of the fiscal year,' he said. But some budget experts have strongly pushed back on the budget chief's characterization, arguing the tactic is 'illegal' and undermines the intent of the ICA. The Government Accountability Office also said during Trump's first presidential term that the law does not allow 'the withholding of funds through their date of expiration.' 'It is a method through which [Vought] would get to impound funds against congressional intent,' said Bobby Kogan, a former Senate budget aide and senior director of federal budget policy at the left-leaning Center for American Progress, in a recent interview. 'Pocket rescission says, 'Well, what if I send up a request 45 days before the end of the fiscal year, then even if Congress says no, I can still end all funding for the rest of the year, right?'' he argued. 'Like that's the concept behind a pocket rescission. Profoundly illegal because it would allow you to impound funds without congressional approval, which is illegal.' At the same time, other experts have argued impoundment law is murky on the matter and have described the tactic as a potential loophole. Some have defended the administration's interpretation of the law and argue lawmakers would have prohibited the maneuver over the years if they wanted to. Not all Republicans are certain about the legality of the use of pocket rescissions, however. 'I don't know. I haven't researched it,' Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), a senior appropriator and former attorney, said this week when asked by reporters whether pocket rescissions were legal. 'I'd prefer that we not do it that way.' The Louisiana Republican, who has been pushing for the White House to work with Congress to get more rescissions packages out the door, instead said it 'wouldn't bother' him if the administration sent 'a rescission package a week and spell out in detail what they want to propose we cut.' There's been concern from members on both sides of the aisle that the administration's plans to continue to claw back federal funding with only GOP support could threaten bipartisan funding talks for fiscal 2026. But Republican rifts over the president's latest rescissions requests were also an issue. The party clashed over potential cuts to programs like the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief and public broadcasting dollars that help fund not only PBS and NPR, but also local stations some Republicans say their constituents depend on. Under the pocket rescissions strategy, experts say the administration could reduce some funding by strategically holding up appropriations set to expire at the end of the fiscal year. If Congress chooses not to approve the administration's request for cuts, it could still provide funding for the program as part of a deal to keep the government open past September. Congress often opts to keep government funding levels mostly the same at the start of a new fiscal year to buy time for a larger deal updating funding levels. But experts have emphasized that would be 'new funding,' noting funding an account was denied at the end of the fiscal year as part of a pocket rescission likely would not roll over into the next. Asked whether another rescissions plan could worsen the outlook for a funding deal for fiscal 2026, House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) said this week that 'the only thing that would worry me is if Congress didn't get a chance to vote on it, that's the key thing.' 'I don't want to see things up here that get jammed where Congress doesn't vote.' Cole was asked whether he was referring to pocket rescissions. 'I don't care procedurally what you want to call it,' he responded. 'I expect Congress to vote on these things, and you know that would worry me, and I know that would worry my colleagues in the other chamber, on both sides of the aisle, certainly worry my Democratic colleagues here.' 'And there's a lot of Republican concern about this too,' he added. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
2 days ago
- Business
- The Hill
Trump team's ‘pocket rescission' idea runs into GOP opposition
Some Republicans in Congress are uneasy about the possibility the Trump administration will use a 'pocket rescission' to claw back already approved government funding as fears of a fall shutdown rise. The Trump administration has already clawed back funds through the use of a rescissions package that passed both chambers of Congress, and some GOP lawmakers are concerned about having to vote on a second, possibly politically tougher, package of cuts. But these lawmakers say the use of pocket rescissions, an idea floated by the White House's budget chief that could yank back money without input from lawmakers, could create bad feelings not only with Democrats, but also with Republicans. 'Pocket rescissions, I think, are unconstitutional,' said Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho), a spending cardinal, this week. 'So, just like impoundment, I think, is unconstitutional.' 'So we'll see how it goes,' he said. Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought referred to pocket rescissions as 'one of the executive tools' that are 'on the table' earlier this month, as the administration continues a sweeping operation aimed at reducing federal spending. 'The president was elected to get us to balance, to deal with our fiscal situation, and we're going to use all of the tools that are there depending on the situation, and as we move through the year,' he said at an event. However, he also noted then that the administration hasn't yet 'made a determination to use it in part because we're making progress during the normal course of business with Congress.' Trump became the first president in decades to successfully claw back funds through the special rescissions process, with the GOP-led Congress agreeing to pull back about $9 billion in previously allocated funding for foreign aid and public broadcasting. The Impoundment Control Act (ICA) lays out rules governing that process and allows the administration to temporarily withhold funding for 45 days while Congress considers the request. If Congress opts not to approve the request in the timeframe, the funds must be released. Under a pocket rescission, however, experts say the president would send the same type of request to Congress, but do so within 45 days of the end of the fiscal year on Sept. 30. The targeted funds could then essentially be held until the clock runs out and they expire. Vought has described the tactic as 'no different than a normal rescission, except for the timing of when it occurs.' 'A pocket rescission occurs later in the end of the fiscal year, within 45 days of the time that you have to hold the funding, and then the money evaporates at the end of the fiscal year,' he said. But some budget experts have strongly pushed back on the budget chief's characterization, arguing the tactic is 'illegal' and undermines the intent of the ICA. The Government Accountability Office also said during Trump's first presidential term that the law does not allow 'the withholding of funds through their date of expiration.' 'It is a method through which [Vought] would get to impound funds against congressional intent,' said Bobby Kogan, a former Senate budget aide and senior director of federal budget policy at the left-leaning Center for American Progress, in a recent interview. 'Pocket rescission says, 'Well, what if I send up a request 45 days before the end of the fiscal year, then even if Congress says no, I can still end all funding for the rest of the year, right?'' he argued. 'Like that's the concept behind a pocket rescission. Profoundly illegal because it would allow you to impound funds without congressional approval, which is illegal.' At the same time, other experts have argued impoundment law is murky on the matter and have described the tactic as a potential loophole. Some have defended the administration's interpretation of the law and argue lawmakers would have prohibited the maneuver over the years if they wanted to. Not all Republicans are certain about the legality of the use of pocket rescissions, however. 'I don't know. I haven't researched it,' Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), a senior appropriator and former attorney, said this week when asked by reporters whether pocket rescissions were legal. 'I'd prefer that we not do it that way.' The Louisiana Republican, who has been pushing for the White House to work with Congress to get more rescissions packages out the door, instead said it 'wouldn't bother' him if the administration sent 'a rescission package a week and spell out in detail what they want to propose we cut.' There's been concern from members on both sides of the aisle that the administration's plans to continue to claw back federal funding with only GOP support could threaten bipartisan funding talks for fiscal 2026. But Republican rifts over the president's latest rescissions requests were also an issue. The party clashed over potential cuts to programs like the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief and public broadcasting dollars that help fund not only PBS and NPR, but also local stations some Republicans say their constituents depend on. Under the pocket rescissions strategy, experts say the administration could reduce some funding by strategically holding up appropriations set to expire at the end of the fiscal year. If Congress chooses not to approve the administration's request for cuts, it could still provide funding for the program as part of a deal to keep the government open past September. Congress often opts to keep government funding levels mostly the same at the start of a new fiscal year to buy time for a larger deal updating funding levels. But experts have emphasized that would be 'new funding,' noting funding an account was denied at the end of the fiscal year as part of a pocket rescission likely would not roll over into the next. Asked whether another rescissions plan could worsen the outlook for a funding deal for fiscal 2026, House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) said this week that 'the only thing that would worry me is if Congress didn't get a chance to vote on it, that's the key thing.' 'I don't want to see things up here that get jammed where Congress doesn't vote.' Cole was asked whether he was referring to pocket rescissions. 'I don't care procedurally what you want to call it,' he responded. 'I expect Congress to vote on these things, and you know that would worry me, and I know that would worry my colleagues in the other chamber, on both sides of the aisle, certainly worry my Democratic colleagues here.' 'And there's a lot of Republican concern about this too,' he added.
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
House Republicans Vote to Rename Kennedy Center Opera House After Melania Trump
House Republicans have made passage of the fiscal 2026 Interior-Environment spending bill contingent, at least for now, on renaming the opera house at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts after Melania Trump. The procedural markup of the spending bill voted on by House appropriators on Tuesday contained a short amendment from Idaho Republican Rep. Mike Simpson: 'Makes technical changes, designates the First Lady Melania Trump Opera House.' More from The Hollywood Reporter Trump's End Game With The Wall Street Journal Defamation Lawsuit Scooter Braun's Response to Still-Angry Taylor Swift Fans on Catalog Purchase: "They Made the Horrible Miscalculation That I Care" Trump's Side Deal With "New Owners" of Paramount May Hint at FCC Concessions The amendment was adopted by a vote of 33 to 25, though the proposed legislation with the renaming amendment has yet to receive a vote by the full Congress, nor is such polling assured. Other sycophantic Republican lawmakers have similarly looked to honor (and flatter) Trump during his second term by, for example, Congressman Addison McDowell proposing legislation to redesignate Washington Dulles International Airport as Donald J. Trump International Airport; new Texas Rep. Brandon Gill proposing a measure to require all $100 bills be redesigned to have Trump's face on them; California Republican Rep. Darrell Issa announcing he's nominating Trump for a Nobel Peace Prize; and Upper New York State Rep. Claudia Tenney proposing Trump's birthday become a national holiday. The possible opera house renaming follows U.S. President Donald Trump and wife Melania in mid-June attending a local debut of Les Misérables at the Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C. The performance was marked by a protest attendance by local drag queens and an eruption of booing and reactive MAGA-rally-style chants from the crowd. The John F. Kennedy Center had already been retooled soon after Trump took control of the institution at the start of his second term, fired its entire board, then replaced them with loyalists including Susie Wiles, his chief of staff, second lady Usha Vance, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick's wife, Allison, and Fox News hosts Maria Bartiromo and Laura Ingraham. The U.S. leader's hand-picked board soon elected Trump to be chairman of the cultural venue. A touring production of the hit musical Hamilton decided against going ahead with plans to play the Kennedy Center in light of Trump's takeover of the institution. Best of The Hollywood Reporter From 'Party in the U.S.A.' to 'Born in the U.S.A.': 20 of America's Most Patriotic (and Un-Patriotic) Musical Offerings Most Anticipated Concert Tours of 2025: Beyoncé, Billie Eilish, Kendrick Lamar & SZA, Sabrina Carpenter and More Hollywood's Most Notable Deaths of 2025
The Independent
7 days ago
- Politics
- The Independent
House Republicans vote to rename the Kennedy Center Opera House
House Republicans are pushing to rename the Kennedy Center 's Opera House after Melania Trump. The House Appropriations Committee approved an amendment proposing the change by a vote of 33-25. Representative Mike Simpson introduced the measure, stating it would recognize Melania Trump's support for the arts. The Opera House, which hosts the annual Kennedy Center Honors, can accommodate over 2,300 attendees. Democrats, including Representative Chellie Pingree, have criticized the amendment as 'divisive'.
Yahoo
7 days ago
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Republicans propose naming Kennedy Center Opera House after Melania Trump
The Kennedy Center's Opera House could soon be called the 'First Lady Melania Trump Opera House.' A Republican proposal would rename the second-largest theater in the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts after the first lady, if legislation considered Tuesday by the House Appropriations Committee becomes law. The first lady, following tradition, is an honorary chair of the Kennedy Center board. A spokesperson for Trump did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho) proposed the amendment during a committee markup of the bill funding the Interior Department, the Environmental Protection Agency and related agencies for fiscal 2026. The committee adopted the measure by a vote of 33-25. Since its opening in 1971, a bipartisan tone has predominated at the Kennedy Center, where crowds have often drawn in arts patrons from across the political spectrum. Its board of trustees members were generally split between Republicans and Democrats, until February when President Donald Trump fired board members who had been appointed by President Joe Biden and replaced them with his own. The trustees then voted him in as president of the Kennedy Center board. If it were to become law, the amendment would mark a further blurring of the center and the Trump administration. Four large portraits of the first and second couples now hang in the Hall of Nations. During the hearing, Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-Maine) said Republicans had 'snuck in, I think, something that is slightly divisive, which is renaming one section of the Kennedy Center after the family member of this administration.' The bill under consideration would provide $37 million in appropriations to the Kennedy Center, a 17 percent decrease from last year and in line with the president's budget proposal. But Pingree also pointed to the $250 million appropriated in the recent One Big Beautiful Bill Act to the center. 'The Republicans have now given the president six times the normal amount of money to run the Kennedy Center, carte blanche over who will be on the board, and how different parts of the Kennedy Center — perhaps the whole Kennedy Center itself — will be named, and this amendment confirms that,' Pingree said. The center's three major stages — the Eisenhower Theater, the Opera House and the Concert Hall — have never previously been renamed. 'This is an excellent way to recognize [Melania Trump's] support and commitment to promoting the arts, and I would encourage members to vote for this Republican en bloc amendment,' said Simpson, chairman of the Appropriations subcommittee on interior, environment and related agencies. The Opera House seats 2,364 patrons and may be the center's most prominent space. It hosts the annual Kennedy Center Honors, the arts institution's marquee event. Celebrities pack into the seats alongside senators, congresspeople and — most notably — the first and second families. The ceremony takes place after a weekend of events, including a dinner at the State Department and a meeting with the president at the White House. Trump broke tradition during his first presidential term by pulling out of the Honors weekend 'to allow the honorees to celebrate without any political distraction,' after Norman Lear, one of the honorees, said he would boycott the White House portion. The Opera House would be far from the first venue to be adorned with the Trump name, a distinction that his skyscrapers, golf clubs and other businesses share. It is not the first such proposal. In late May, Rep. Greg Steube (R-Fla.) proposed the halting of funding to the Washington Metropolitan Area Transportation Authority unless its name was changed to Washington Metropolitan Authority for Greater Access (i.e. WMAGA) and unless Metrorail (the D.C. area's subway system) was renamed the 'Trump Train.' It was one of many such ideas from House Republicans, as The Washington Post reported in June. Others include carving Trump's face into Mount Rushmore, putting his face on U.S. currency, renaming Washington Dulles International Airport after him and making his birthday a national holiday. 'It is unprecedented and to be honest with you, it's completely wild,' John White, professor emeritus of politics at Catholic University, told The Post at the time. 'History shows that most things are named after presidents after they have either long left office or been deceased.' Brianna Tucker contributed to this report.
