<p>Senate appropriators are considering a ban on pocket rescissions as part of the next spending package after President Donald Trump rescinded $810 million in congressionally approved funding.</p>
<p>Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Susan Collins (R-ME) stated on Monday that she aims to address the Trump administration's spending actions following the rescission and that appropriators are looking into prohibiting "pocket rescissions" in the upcoming spending bill.</p>
<p>It remains uncertain whether any provisions added by appropriators would restore the canceled funding or prevent future rescissions by the president. Incorporating such language into spending bills, which require bipartisan support to pass, may present challenges in the Senate.</p>
<p>Democrats previously attempted to include language to block the White House from using pocket rescissions in a funding patch passed in August but were opposed by Republicans. This effort followed Trump's cancellation of billions in foreign aid last year. A pocket rescission allows a president to request Congress to block funding near the end of the fiscal year, causing the funds to expire before Congress can review the request within the 45-day period mandated by law. Trump notified Congress on Friday about the $810 million cut affecting programs related to illegal immigration, diversity initiatives, education, health research, and other areas the administration opposed.</p>
<p>Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), another GOP appropriator, characterized pocket rescissions as "sneaky and designed to go around Congress" during a press briefing on Monday.</p>
<p>"I think we need, we as Congress, need to figure out how we can limit the ability of a pocket rescission," she said. When asked about the potential for more restrictions against pocket rescissions in future spending bills, Murkowski indicated that appropriators could do more but that it would require annual renewal and suggested reforms to the Impoundment Act.</p>
<p>Collins, who is facing a competitive race against Democrat Troy Jackson, expressed her opposition to Trump's rescissions on Friday through a statement on social media, stating that the action was taken "without warning or consultation" and described it as an "attempt by this Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to undermine Congress’s Constitutional power of the purse."</p>
<p>She added, "Not only is the delay itself an impoundment that was not reported to Congress, but also it is a usurpation of Congress’s appropriations powers. OMB is an agency of the executive branch. It does not get to decide which programs are worth funding."</p>
<p>Senator John Cornyn (R-TX), who lost his primary to Trump-backed Ken Paxton, expressed agreement with Collins's view, stating he does not believe the president has the authority to rescind the funds.</p>
<p>However, not all senators aligned with Collins, as Senator James Lankford (R-OK) indicated he would not go as far as to label Trump's actions as unlawful.</p>
<p>It remains unclear whether any proposed language to restrict the president's use of pocket rescissions would pass in the Senate, where appropriations bills must achieve a 60-vote threshold.</p>
<p>Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) avoided directly addressing whether he agrees with Collins on the legality of the fund cancellations, stating that Collins, as an appropriator, "feels strongly that these are decisions made by appropriators, and that the administration doesn’t have this authority. But that, again, is something the court will probably decide."</p>
<p>"Some of these things may be things that many of us agree with, but the process by which they did it is one that is going to be, I assume, subject to a lot of discussion and probably some litigation," Thune added.</p>
<p>On the House side, GOP appropriator Andrew Clyde (R-GA) referred to Trump's rescission as "excellent news" and asserted that "Americans’ tax dollars shouldn’t be funding woke and wasteful nonsense — including services for illegal aliens."</p>
<p>The Washington Examiner reached out to other House Republican appropriators for comments on pocket rescissions but did not receive responses by the time of publication.</p>
<p>While House GOP appropriators largely refrained from commenting on the rescissions, top Democratic appropriator Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) urged Republicans to reject the "attempt to circumvent Congress" and accused the Trump administration of "unlawfully impounding funds all year just to get to this point."</p>