A White House order to freeze federal grants reflects a theory of presidential power that Donald Trump clearly endorsed during his 2024 campaign. The approach was further outlined in the Project 2025 governing treatise that candidate Trump furiously denied was a blueprint for his second administration.
At face value, the Monday evening memo from Matthew Vaeth, acting director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, is meant to bring federal spending in line with Trump’s executive actions, notably on LGBTQ+ issues, civil rights, energy and environmental policy.
Vaeth’s memo invoked nakedly ideological terms: “The use of Federal resources to advance Marxist equity, transgenderism, and green new deal social engineering policies is a waste of taxpayer dollars that does not improve the day-to-day lives of those we serve.”
The memo could affect operations that go well beyond policy areas Vaeth singled out. It is a potential blueprint for how Trump could try to wield executive power throughout his presidency.
Here is an explanation:
OMB is a critical power center
The President and his conservative allies made clear long before Vaeth’s memo that they see the Office of Management and Budget as a linchpin of power across the federal government.
Part of the Executive Office of the President, the OMB staff prepares the President’s budget recommendations to Congress and oversees implementation of the president’s priorities across all Executive Branch agencies. Lawmakers pass appropriations but executive agencies carry out federal programs and services. The overall process puts OMB on the front and back end of federal government strategy.
Project 2025 authors, including Trump’s pick for OMB chief, Russell Vought, emphasized this function. Writing the Project 2025 chapter on presidential authority, Vought, who awaits Senate confirmation, made clear that he wants the post to wield more direct power.
“The Director must view his job as the best, most comprehensive approximation of the President’s mind,” Vought wrote. The OMB, he declared, “is a President’s air-traffic control system” and should be “involved in all aspects of the White House policy process,” becoming “powerful enough to override implementing agencies’ bureaucracies.”
Elsewhere, Project 2025 authors call for all presidential appointees to control “unaccountable federal spending” and set a course from the West Wing to subdue what Trump often calls “the Deep State” of government civil servants.
“The Administrative State is not going anywhere until Congress acts to retrieve its own power from bureaucrats and the White House,” they wrote. “In the meantime, there are many executive tools a courageous conservative president can use to handcuff the bureaucracy (and) bring the Administrative State to heel.”
Trump has declared himself the final arbiter of government spending
In some ways, the President and his campaign went farther than Project 2025 in asserting presidential power over federal purse strings. In his Agenda 47, Trump endorsed “impoundment.” That legal theory holds that when lawmakers pass appropriations to fulfill their duties laid out in Article I of the Constitution, they simply set a spending ceiling, but not a floor.
The president, the logic goes, can simply decide not to spend money on anything he deems unnecessary, because Article II of the Constitution gives the president the role of executing the laws that Congress passes.
Congress acted during Richard Nixon’s presidency to reject “impoundment” theory. But Trump’s circle wants to challenge that – potentially setting up a constitutional fight that would require the Supreme Court to weigh in.
Vought did not venture into impoundment in his Project 2025 chapter. But, he wrote that the president “should use every possible tool to propose and impose fiscal discipline on the federal government. Anything short of that would constitute abject failure.”
The grants memo is a key clue to how DOGE could work
The President’s path to impose spending cuts quickly now has become clearer.
Elon Musk, leading Trump’s new Department of Government Efficiency, has suggested he could find federal spending cuts measuring in the trillions, even as Trump has promised to protect Social Security and Medicare. (That pledge was reflected in the memo pausing federal grants.)
The OMB memo, Trump’s theory of impoundment, and his efforts to strip thousands of federal employees of their civil service protections all add up to a concentration of power in the West Wing that could define his second administration and Musk’s part in it.
For example, Trump cannot on his own repeal legislation like the Clean Air Act or the Clean Water Act. But OMB could effectively cut off money for the programs, jobs and contractors necessary to enforce those laws. (Trump already has issued a wide-ranging federal hiring freeze.)
Similarly, Trump does not have to persuade Congress to change Medicaid laws and appropriations if the White House steps in to adjust or stop Medicaid payments to state governments that administer the programs at ground level.
___
Republished with permission of The Associated Press.
3 comments
PeterH
January 28, 2025 at 8:40 pm
80% to 90% of Trump’s executive orders will be contested in court.
MarvinM
January 28, 2025 at 10:58 pm
“Project 2025 authors, including Trump’s pick for OMB chief, Russell Vought, emphasized this function. Writing the Project 2025 chapter on presidential authority, Vought, who awaits Senate confirmation, made clear that he wants the post to wield more direct power.”
This sounds like a really good reason to NOT confirm him.
Remember how Trump said he knew nothing about Project 2025 and even that he thought some of their ideas were out there? Well, weirdly enough, everything he’s doing is right in line with the Project 2025 agenda. So, was he lying then, or is he just being puppet-mastered by others like Vought now?
The right way to see that your agenda is carried out is to pass a budget that proportionately funds the ideals of your agenda. Should not be hard when your party has the majority of both the House and the Senate, right?
As spelled out in our Constitution, Congress controls spending, not the president. To allow the president such spending decision latitude as is suggested in this ‘freeze’ memo is at best unadvisable and at worst unconstitutional.
I thought Pres. Trump just took an oath to uphold the law and the Constitution.
And yet, in less than nine days, he:
-Declares no more birthright citizenship (unconstitutional)
-Fires IGs without cause (unlawful)
-Freezes monies already appropriated by Congress with the suggestion he can decide which will get spent later – maybe – if he authorizes it (unconstitutional).
And more, but I’ll stop for now. You’d think that would be enough.
Ron Ogden
January 29, 2025 at 9:23 am
There is nothing unlawful or unconstitutional about putting a new emphasis on accountability and transparency in government.
Unexpected, perhaps. Uncomfortable, certainly. Unpresidential, only if you judge Trump’s actions against the last president’s, and the American voters have already done that–in case you missed it.