Formatting necessary for an accurate reading of this text may be shown by tags (e.g., <DELETED> or <BOLD>) or may be missing from this TXT display. For complete and accurate display of this text, see the PDF.
[Page S2692]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CONGRESSIONAL POWER OF THE PURSE ACT
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, the authors of our Constitution
purposefully built checks and balances into the foundation of our
democracy, and the power of the purse is a critical part of those
checks and balances. Article 1, section 9 of the Constitution states
``No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of
Appropriations made by Law.'' That means Congress, not the executive
branch, is charged with making decisions about how to invest and spend
Federal revenue. As the vice chairman of the Appropriations Committee,
I take this responsibility very seriously.
When Congress appropriates Federal dollars, we expect those dollars
to be used as directed. We expect appropriations laws to be upheld, and
we expect the administration to be transparent in its actions.
But for too many years, Presidents of both parties have encroached on
the power of the purse as they have tried to expand their budgetary
powers and, in some cases, substitute their judgement for that of
Congress. This has been acutely true under this administration. No
President has pushed the boundaries of and contorted appropriations law
more than President Trump.
When Congress refused to give President Trump the money he requested
for a wall on the southern border, he directed his administration to
sidestep Congress and take it from funding for our military and their
families. He continues to do so to this day.
The President wanted to pressure the Government of Ukraine into
investigating his political rival, so he withheld security money for
Ukraine in violation of the Impoundment Control Act. An action that
would eventually lead to his impeachment.
Last year, the administration asserted to Congress that it had the
power to propose rescissions in the last quarter of the fiscal year and
further asserted it had the power to allow the funds to lapse if
Congress did not act on its proposal, essentially claiming the
executive branch, not Congress, had the last word on spending. The
Government Accountability Office, GAO, thankfully and rightfully,
disagreed. Last year, this administration also overturned a long held
precedent that the executive branch did not need to respond to findings
by GAO of violations of the Anti-Deficiency Act. Finally, this
administration has suppressed OMB and executive branch agency
cooperation with GAO in investigating the execution of appropriated
funds.
The push and pull over the power of the purse between Congress and
the executive branch did not start with President Trump and will not
end when he is no longer in office. Administrations of both parties
have clashed with Congress over this authority. But the actions of this
President make clear that Congress needs to reassert itself and defend
its constitutionally granted prerogatives. This should not be a
partisan issue. The Founders chose to vest the power of the purse with
Congress. It is an important part of our system of checks and balances,
and we must defend it.
That is why I am introducing the Congressional Power of the Purse
Act. This bill will restore Congress's central role in funding
decisions, increase transparency in the executive branch, and add teeth
to existing budget laws.
The bill strengthens the Impoundment Control Act, including the
addition of penalties for failure to comply. The bill strengthens
administration reporting requirements and congressional oversight
tools, so Congress can better follow the money and ensure the law is
being complied with. Finally, the bill reforms the National Emergencies
Act of 1974 to provide more Congressional control over these
designations and how they are used. I hope all members can support it.
I commend Representative Lowey and Representative Yarmuth for
introducing a similar bill in the House, and I hope that the House will
send the bill to the Senate in July.
I ask unanimous consent that the following members be listed as
original cosponsors: Senators Murray, Van Hollen, Feinstein, Coons,
Baldwin, Wyden, Merkley, Whitehouse, Schatz, Sanders, Shaheen, Tester,
Udall, Cardin, Reed, Durbin, Murphy and Manchin. I would note that this
list of cosponsors includes every Democratic Member of the
Appropriations Committee.
(At the request of Mr. Durbin, the following statement was ordered to
be printed in the Record.)
____________________
